NetNews Usenet Archive 1993 #3/NN_1993_3.iso/spool/alt/messiani/4216

Internet Message Format | 1993-01-28 | 3.5 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!olivea!pagesat!netsys!agate!spool.mu.edu!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!destroyer!news.itd.umich.edu!ivrit.ra.itd.umich.edu!jlove
From: [e-mail] (Jack Love)
Newsgroups: alt.messianic
Subject: Re: A Neutral Prayer (was Re: Disproof of "Proof 2")
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 27 Jan 93 16:49:07 GMT
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Organization: /usr/local/trn/lib/organization
Lines: 55
NNTP-Posting-Host: ivrit.ra.itd.umich.edu

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] writes:
[Preceded by quotations from Andrew and responses by Jim]
>Hmm.  This seems pretty vicious.  I wonder if you can find a biblical
>reference that God cannot take on a human form.  The opinion of one
>rabbi, even Maimonides, who speaks against Christianity with full
>knowledge of its theology is not particularly impressive.  In the
>absence of a biblical reference, it can be viewed as a purely
>reactionary anti-Christian viewpoint.
>
>Now I can find biblical references that refer to Jewish polytheism in
>the Old Testament.  Doesn't Genesis refer to the creation of Adam in
>"our form"?  Doesn't David refer to himself and other Jews as "the
>gods" in the Psalms?  Does this mean that Judaism is from its
>beginning and in its flower also polytheistic and idolatrous?
>Does this make the Old Testamet an idolatrous work?

Although I hate to speak for others on the net, I think Andrew
was being deliberately provocative and also attempting to inject
a little humor into the discussion. First of all, I'd like to
say that I reject the notion that Christianity is polytheistic,
pagan or idolatrous. This topic has appeared repeatedly in
rabbinic Jewish literature, and the discussions are quite
interesting. While I don't have time to cite sources here, the
general conclusions are as follows: rabbinic authors who lived
in Muslim lands usually held that Christianity is idolatrous,
etc, but Islam is not. Rabbinic authors who lived in Christian
environment often concluded that Islam is idolatrous, but
Christianity is not. Most modern researchers have concluded
that in each case, 1) the rabbinic authors were really not
sufficiently knowledgeable about the religion they were
characterizing as idolatrous; and 2) it is easier to call
someone idolatrous when they have no power over you.

Ignorance is almost always at the heart of bigotry. Consider
the Jewish customs that are displayed when the Torah is
removed from the Ark. All that bowing and kissing. To the
uninformed outsider, it sure does look like we are worshipping
the Torah scroll itself, rather than the God who revealed it.

It is abundantly clear that Christians themselves have had
enormous difficulties with justifying the notion that they
are pure monotheists and at the same time holding with various
doctrines such as different "flavors" of trinitarianism. As
many readers of the Newsgroup are painfully aware, various
Christian sects have persecuted other Christians even to the
point of martyrdom over these issues. Of especial interest
to a.m. readers ought to be the manner in which the Ebionites
were treated. Be all this as it may, when all the doctrinal
nitpicking is resolved, no Christian denomination fits the
rabbinic Jewish category of idolatrous. imho.

--
________________________________________
Jack F. Love    |     Opinions expressed are mine alone.
        |    (Unless you happen to agree.)