The Jewish Annotated New Testament

[Vetus Ordo]

I reserve the right to respect the religious beliefs of non-Catholics. People like you almost (but not quite) make me ashamed of being Catholic. Grow a pair yourself.      :bronxcheer:

You have the Christian duty to respect and love not only those in the church but also those outside her.

However, there's no need to respect the false creeds that put these people's own souls in peril. In fact, one must labour to preach against them.

[GottmitunsAlex]

[/quote]

You have the Christian duty to respect and love not only those in the church but also those outside her.

However, there's no need to respect the false creeds that put these people's own souls in peril. In fact, one must labour to preach against them.
[/quote]
THIS

[jovan66102]

I reserve the right to respect the religious beliefs of non-Catholics. People like you almost (but not quite) make me ashamed of being Catholic. Grow a pair yourself.      :bronxcheer:

You have the Christian duty to respect and love not only those in the church but also those outside her.

However, there's no need to respect the false creeds that put these people's own souls in peril. In fact, one must labour to preach against them.

This! But Grasshopper seems to be a thoroughgoing libtard who believes all religions lead to heaven. Otherwise, he would understand!

[INPEFESS]

They just think we're wrong. No crime in that.

The Jews have no excuse before God.

Their continual rejection of Christ is a living testament to their perfidy and a punishment for their iniquity.

Accepting or rejecting our Lord is not a mere philosophical quandary of no practical importance. It is the most important decision a man has to make in his life.

No, you're wrong. The rejection of Christ is founded in mere scholarly and philosophical disagreements. Hence, there are "perfectly good reasons" for rejecting Christ as the Saviour of mankind. Benedict XVI says so:

“It is of course possible to read the Old Testament so that it is not directed toward Christ; it does not point quite unequivocally to Christ.  And if Jews cannot see the promises as being fulfilled in him, this is not just ill will on their part, but genuinely because of the obscurity of the texts and the tension in the relationship between these texts and the figure of Jesus. Jesus brings a new meaning to these texts – yet it is he who first gives them their proper coherence and relevance and significance. There are perfectly good reasons, then, for denying that the Old Testament refers to Christ and for saying, No, that is not what he said. And there are also good reasons for referring it to him – that is what the dispute between Jews and Christians is about.”

[Crusading Philologist]

They just think we're wrong. No crime in that.

The Jews have no excuse before God.

Their continual rejection of Christ is a living testament to their perfidy and a punishment for their iniquity.

Accepting or rejecting our Lord is not a mere philosophical quandary of no practical importance. It is the most important decision a man has to make in his life.

No, you're wrong. The rejection of Christ is founded in mere scholarly and philosophical disagreements. Hence, there are good reasons for rejecting Christ as the Saviour of mankind. Benedict XVI says so:

“It is of course possible to read the Old Testament so that it is not directed toward Christ; it does not point quite unequivocally to Christ.  And if Jews cannot see the promises as being fulfilled in him, this is not just ill will on their part, but genuinely because of the obscurity of the texts and the tension in the relationship between these texts and the figure of Jesus. Jesus brings a new meaning to these texts – yet it is he who first gives them their proper coherence and relevance and significance. There are perfectly good reasons, then, for denying that the Old Testament refers to Christ and for saying, No, that is not what he said. And there are also good reasons for referring it to him – that is what the dispute between Jews and Christians is about.”

::)

The Holy Father is talking about debates over how we should read the Old Testament. Nothing in that quotation implies that Pope Benedict believes that "[t]he rejection of Christ is founded in mere scholarly and philosophical disagreements."

[GottmitunsAlex]

They just think we're wrong. No crime in that.

The Jews have no excuse before God.

Their continual rejection of Christ is a living testament to their perfidy and a punishment for their iniquity.

Accepting or rejecting our Lord is not a mere philosophical quandary of no practical importance. It is the most important decision a man has to make in his life.

No, you're wrong. The rejection of Christ is founded in mere scholarly and philosophical disagreements. Hence, there are good reasons for rejecting Christ as the Saviour of mankind. Benedict XVI says so:

“It is of course possible to read the Old Testament so that it is not directed toward Christ; it does not point quite unequivocally to Christ.  And if Jews cannot see the promises as being fulfilled in him, this is not just ill will on their part, but genuinely because of the obscurity of the texts and the tension in the relationship between these texts and the figure of Jesus. Jesus brings a new meaning to these texts – yet it is he who first gives them their proper coherence and relevance and significance. There are perfectly good reasons, then, for denying that the Old Testament refers to Christ and for saying, No, that is not what he said. And there are also good reasons for referring it to him – that is what the dispute between Jews and Christians is about.”

::)

The Holy Father is talking about debates over how we should read the Old Testament. Nothing in that quotation implies that Pope Benedict believes that "[t]he rejection of Christ is founded in mere scholarly and philosophical disagreements."

I concurr

[INPEFESS]

They just think we're wrong. No crime in that.

The Jews have no excuse before God.

Their continual rejection of Christ is a living testament to their perfidy and a punishment for their iniquity.

Accepting or rejecting our Lord is not a mere philosophical quandary of no practical importance. It is the most important decision a man has to make in his life.

No, you're wrong. The rejection of Christ is founded in mere scholarly and philosophical disagreements. Hence, there are good reasons for rejecting Christ as the Saviour of mankind. Benedict XVI says so:

“It is of course possible to read the Old Testament so that it is not directed toward Christ; it does not point quite unequivocally to Christ.  And if Jews cannot see the promises as being fulfilled in him, this is not just ill will on their part, but genuinely because of the obscurity of the texts and the tension in the relationship between these texts and the figure of Jesus. Jesus brings a new meaning to these texts – yet it is he who first gives them their proper coherence and relevance and significance. There are perfectly good reasons, then, for denying that the Old Testament refers to Christ and for saying, No, that is not what he said. And there are also good reasons for referring it to him – that is what the dispute between Jews and Christians is about.”

::)

The Holy Father is talking about debates over how we should read the Old Testament. Nothing in that quotation implies that Pope Benedict believes that "[t]he rejection of Christ is founded in mere scholarly and philosophical disagreements."

[T]hat is what the dispute between Jews and Christians is about.

Is that really all it's about?

[Someone1776]

They just think we're wrong. No crime in that.

The Jews have no excuse before God.

Their continual rejection of Christ is a living testament to their perfidy and a punishment for their iniquity.

Accepting or rejecting our Lord is not a mere philosophical quandary of no practical importance. It is the most important decision a man has to make in his life.

No, you're wrong. The rejection of Christ is founded in mere scholarly and philosophical disagreements. Hence, there are good reasons for rejecting Christ as the Saviour of mankind. Benedict XVI says so:

“It is of course possible to read the Old Testament so that it is not directed toward Christ; it does not point quite unequivocally to Christ.  And if Jews cannot see the promises as being fulfilled in him, this is not just ill will on their part, but genuinely because of the obscurity of the texts and the tension in the relationship between these texts and the figure of Jesus. Jesus brings a new meaning to these texts – yet it is he who first gives them their proper coherence and relevance and significance. There are perfectly good reasons, then, for denying that the Old Testament refers to Christ and for saying, No, that is not what he said. And there are also good reasons for referring it to him – that is what the dispute between Jews and Christians is about.”

::)

The Holy Father is talking about debates over how we should read the Old Testament. Nothing in that quotation implies that Pope Benedict believes that "[t]he rejection of Christ is founded in mere scholarly and philosophical disagreements."

This. It's amazing how people have twisted the whole point of that book.  Jesus of Nazareth's main argument is that Christ is God and that this fact is central to Christianity but has been forgotten by too many Christians. If he's not God then he is not a nice guy and he's a lunatic and  evil.  In the Pope's first volume he uses A Rabbi Talks to Jesus to great affect in explaining why people found Christ so shocking and why so many people rejected him then and now.  He's absolutely right that the dispute between Judaism and Christianity is over whether Christ is God.  And he is very much right that Christ was not the messiah the Jews were expecting.  And I am sure the vast majority of Jews reject Christ because they honestly don't think he was God not because they hate God.  Now whether this will make much difference of the day of judgement is a different matter.  

[Someone1776]

They just think we're wrong. No crime in that.

The Jews have no excuse before God.

Their continual rejection of Christ is a living testament to their perfidy and a punishment for their iniquity.

Accepting or rejecting our Lord is not a mere philosophical quandary of no practical importance. It is the most important decision a man has to make in his life.

No, you're wrong. The rejection of Christ is founded in mere scholarly and philosophical disagreements. Hence, there are good reasons for rejecting Christ as the Saviour of mankind. Benedict XVI says so:

“It is of course possible to read the Old Testament so that it is not directed toward Christ; it does not point quite unequivocally to Christ.  And if Jews cannot see the promises as being fulfilled in him, this is not just ill will on their part, but genuinely because of the obscurity of the texts and the tension in the relationship between these texts and the figure of Jesus. Jesus brings a new meaning to these texts – yet it is he who first gives them their proper coherence and relevance and significance. There are perfectly good reasons, then, for denying that the Old Testament refers to Christ and for saying, No, that is not what he said. And there are also good reasons for referring it to him – that is what the dispute between Jews and Christians is about.”

::)

The Holy Father is talking about debates over how we should read the Old Testament. Nothing in that quotation implies that Pope Benedict believes that "[t]he rejection of Christ is founded in mere scholarly and philosophical disagreements."

[T]hat is what the dispute between Jews and Christians is about.

Is that really all it's about?

Yeah, the dispute is over whether Christ is God or not.  If you had actually read the book rather than copying out select paragraphs out of context you would know that. 

[GottmitunsAlex]

They just think we're wrong. No crime in that.

The Jews have no excuse before God.

Their continual rejection of Christ is a living testament to their perfidy and a punishment for their iniquity.

Accepting or rejecting our Lord is not a mere philosophical quandary of no practical importance. It is the most important decision a man has to make in his life.

No, you're wrong. The rejection of Christ is founded in mere scholarly and philosophical disagreements. Hence, there are good reasons for rejecting Christ as the Saviour of mankind. Benedict XVI says so:

“It is of course possible to read the Old Testament so that it is not directed toward Christ; it does not point quite unequivocally to Christ.  And if Jews cannot see the promises as being fulfilled in him, this is not just ill will on their part, but genuinely because of the obscurity of the texts and the tension in the relationship between these texts and the figure of Jesus. Jesus brings a new meaning to these texts – yet it is he who first gives them their proper coherence and relevance and significance. There are perfectly good reasons, then, for denying that the Old Testament refers to Christ and for saying, No, that is not what he said. And there are also good reasons for referring it to him – that is what the dispute between Jews and Christians is about.”

::)

The Holy Father is talking about debates over how we should read the Old Testament. Nothing in that quotation implies that Pope Benedict believes that "[t]he rejection of Christ is founded in mere scholarly and philosophical disagreements."

[T]hat is what the dispute between Jews and Christians is about.

Is that really all it's about?

Yeah, the dispute is over whether Christ is God or not.  If you had actually read the book rather than copying out select paragraphs out of context you would know that. 

:w2go: