/christian/ - christian

>>22299 (OP) 
>So we all know that a good chunk of Jewish people rejected Christ and went on to become the modern religion of Talmudic Judaism
I don't think I know that. My reading of history is that there were three Jewish revolts, and the Romans had enough of their rebellions, slaughtered them, and forbid the few survivors from ever returning to Jerusalem. 
Christians suffered under the pagan Romans because the Romans considered them just a denomination of Judaism. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish%E2%80%93Roman_wars#Bar_Kokhba_Revolt
Simon bar Kokhba, the commander of the revolt, was acclaimed as a Messiah, a heroic figure who could restore Israel. ... " Roman army made up of six full legions with auxilia and elements from up to six additional legions finally crushed it.[30]

Judea's rural countryside was devastated and depopulated due to the brutal suppression of the revolt.[31][32][33][34][35] During this period, Jerusalem was rebuilt into a Roman colony called Aelia Capitolina, and the province of Judea was renamed Syria Palaestina. The Romans barred Jews from Jerusalem, except to attend Tisha B'Av. Although Jewish Christians hailed Jesus as the Messiah and did not support Bar Kokhba, they were barred from Jerusalem along with the rest of the Jews.[citation needed] The war and its aftermath helped differentiate Christianity as a religion distinct from Judaism.''

Messianic Jews who believed Christ to be the messiah became known as "Christians"

Could be wrong. feel free to disagree. 

As I understand it, the Babylonian Talmud, a book of wickedness and lies, was brought back by the Jews after the Babylonian captivity. The shift from the Torah to the Talmud was pronounced e.g. the Jews lying about Christ to Pontius Pilate to murder him (a clear vioation of thou shalt not kill and thou shalt not bear false witness) yet making sure they didn't set foot in Pilate's pagan ground before Passover, least they be "unclean" is a clear example of  their wickedness, and their belief in Kokhba and their right to rule over "cattle" i.e. everyone else in the world, was more a promise from Satan than anything God promised them in the Torah.

>>22300

I greatly appreciate the info and for corrections where I was mistaken.  Nevertheless, you misunderstand me in some areas.  For example:

>Messianic Jews who believed Christ to be the >messiah became known as "Christians"

>Could be wrong. feel free to disagree.

When I say Messianic Jews, I'm not talking about the 1st century Jews who were the first Christians.  I am referring to current day adherents to the modern religion of Messianic Judaism (who actively prefer to not be called "Christian."):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messianic_Judaism

Also my main central question remains unanswered.  

Especially in current day Israel, but also all around the world, if someone refers to themself as "Jewish," 9.9 times out of 10, they do not believe in Jesus as the Messiah, and are somewhere on the spectrum of Talmudic Judaism.  Whether it be full blown Ultraorthodox Jews, or Secularists who engage in Jewish holidays, rituals and traditions for the sake of cultural identity.

However, if you were to ask me to point out an individual or community of Jews who believe in Christ and are Christians in the traditional sense of the term, who are directly descended from the original 1st century Jewish Christians, I would be at a total loss.  Where are they?  What happened to them?  Are they in small obscure gatherings that I am ignorant of?  Or did they essentially intermarry into the Gentile populations around them, and thus no longer exist as a distinct group?

>>22300
>As I understand it, the Babylonian Talmud, a book of wickedness and lies, was brought back by the Jews after the Babylonian captivity.
You mean like during the time of Daniel? Because the Talmud (both versions) weren't made until after the destruction of the second temple. They were suppose to unite the divided Jewish people (each village had its own kind of interpretations and customs and they needed unity to survive the diaspora)

y.jpg
[Hide] (2.9KB, 225x225)

>>22309
>Because the Talmud (both versions) weren't made until after the destruction of the second temple. 
This can't be stressed enough because its origins stem from Jews that moved BACK to Babylon(!) after the destruction of the Roman-Jewish Wars, not from the Babylonian exile. Everyone just assumes it comes from the exile due to the name (ans deliberate confusion over its history), but the reality is even more ridiculous in that this group chose to return to the centre of idolatry that God had delivered them from to produce the worst writings in the history of mankind:
>The Babylonian Talmud (Talmud Bavli) consists of documents compiled over the period of late antiquity (3rd to 6th centuries).[14] During this time, the most important of the Jewish centres in Mesopotamia, a region called "Babylonia" in Jewish sources and later known as Iraq, were Nehardea, Nisibis (modern Nusaybin), Mahoza (al-Mada'in, just to the south of what is now Baghdad), Pumbedita (near present-day al Anbar Governorate), and the Sura Academy, probably located about 60 km (37 mi) south of Baghdad.[15]

>>22299 (OP) 
Allegedly there are Christian communities in Israel and Palestine. I guess these are most likely to be descendants of the originals but I also suspect this
>Did the original Jewish Christians simply intermarry amongst the Gentiles to the point of being absorbed?
to be true. Once they accepted Christ they lost the need for genealogical purity and the inbreeding it engenders.

>>22299 (OP) 
https://yewtu.be/watch?v=uzuYZi749CM
This video in denominations I think may imply an answer. 
Jewish Christians were those who stoll kept the old covenant; but then they Listened too the Pauline Christian's and eventually only practiced the New Covenant.

using /christian/ to talk about jews made me realize that we don't have a /judaism/ or /jewish/ board even when we have the /islam/ one.
We should have one or at least make public the israel chan

>>22299 (OP) 
what is Jewish culture but the sum total of the mosaic law? Take it away and all is left is language at best, Jews were always a minority especially after getting crushed by the Romans. Of course there are the Ethiopians were majority Jewish being known as 'beta-israel' and many of them who accepted Christianity kept their judaizing customs.

>>22299 (OP) 
>So what happened to them or where are they?  Did the original Jewish Christians simply intermarry amongst the Gentiles to the point of being absorbed?
The original Jewish Christians became the Church. The Church in the NT is Israel in the OT. The Apostles and Paul did not flip from one religion to the other. They stayed the same religion because they were watching the fulfillment of the OT prophesies in real-time. Christianity has direct continuity with the 2nd Temple in both theology and praxis. Something that Rabbinic Judaism cannot claim, because it came on the scene much later. So to look for the original Jewish Christians is to look at the early Church. 
https://youtu.be/jkmh68urI6A?si=Iuw3HqSQrPVgQqpO

5292r3df2rrr3MEM060923.jpg.jpg
[Hide] (195KB, 1800x1223)

>>23455
Heh. That'd be about like holding up a big juicy raw steak to a big doggo. What would the ADL think?  :^)

>>25514
>They stayed the same religion because they were watching the fulfillment of the OT prophesies in real-time. 
No, the Christian Church very clearly began on a single day (Pentecost following Christ's resurrection, ~50days later IIRC). The Law was there only to serve as a 'Schoolmaster', so man would understand his own utter depravity and destructive doom in hell without Christ's sacrifice on all our behalfs.
>tl;dr
Judaic Law is no longer in effect (having been perfectly-fulfilled). Christianity arose thereafter. There was a clear dividing line between the two.
>ttl;dr
There is no such thing as 'Judeo-Christians', btw.  :^)

>>25516
Nothing you said invalidates the fact that the Apostles did not change their religion aside from recognizing that fulfillment of the prophecies with the coming of Christ. Of course with the coming of Christ we have moved from Law to Grace but it doesn't change the religion; same triune God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob, same scriptures, same religious liturgical practices with some changes added to place the focus on Christ. Having the Holy Spirit descend on them didn't change their religious beliefs because they already saw their religious beliefs fulfilled in real time. It was those Jews who rejected Christ that changed their beliefs because they rejected the prophecies which have been fulfilled and now follow a distorted and inverse view of the OT. Give the video a view for a much deeper dip. 

>Christianity arose thereafter. There was a clear dividing line between the two.
There isn't and you haven't shown one, at least not with the 2nd Temple. With Rabbinic Judaism absolutely because it sprouted up like 500+ years after the fact. 

>Judeo-Christians
I never used this phrase at all. It would be more accurate to refer to Christians as Israelites since we are the true Israel.

>>25516
'Judeo-Christion' is a political term not a theological one. The Talmud is not a thing known by the mainstream and so I think if is was the assumed similarity between Christianity and Judism would be dropped.

>>25517
>but it doesn't change the religion
No, there's a very clear delineation between Judaism & Christianity in the New Testament. Christ Himself is the 'scandalon' (rock of offense in the Greek), and was anathema to the Jews. They literally killed Him over His claim to be equal to God the Father. 

With all due respect, I believe you're allowing your modern sensibilities to cloud your judgment on this matter. Judaism and Christianity are very distinct religions today, regardless of the deeper truths of God that extend back past before the time of Abraham. I'm also skeptical of the claim that believing Christians are somehow 'Israel' today. Jesus & the rest of the NT are quite clear that we are distinct groups, and that we have been "grafted in" as additions, not replacements.

>tl;dr
Just ask an orthodox Jew what he thinks about Jesus Christ, Anon.  :^)

>>25518
>'Judeo-Christion' is a political term not a theological one.
Fair enough. But I know of a lot of nominal Christians in the evangelical Protestant branch who claim that that phrase is both completely-real, and applies to themselves directly. There are plenty of Jews themselves who are promoting this idea as well.

Please understand I'm not disagreeing with you you Anon, simply pointing out the reality on the ground in many Christian churches today.

>>25519
>With all due respect, I believe you're allowing your modern sensibilities to cloud your judgment on this matter. Judaism and Christianity are very distinct religions today
I get what your trying to say. But I feel that you are mistaking what is identified as Judaism today, Rabbinic Judaism, with what was practiced during the time of Christ and the Apostles, ie 2nd Temple Judaism. The consensus is actually beginning to shift and show that during that time there were multiple sects of Judaism being practiced. The most well known sects being the Pharisees, Sadducees, Essenes, and the Christians. The Christians being the only ones that accepted Christ as the messiah of course. However, as the others fell away after the destruction of the Temple, Christianity survived and continued the 2nd Temple liturgical practices with some modification to place emphasis on Christ. Nowhere at this time was anything resembling what we know today as Rabbinic Judaism. Rabbinic Judaism came about much later primarily as reactionary movement against the growing influence of Christianity among the remaining Jewish population. There was no complied Talmud or Masoretic text at the time of the Apostles. And these texts would not appear for another 500+ years. The Judaism today is not the Israelite religion. The Israelite religion is Christianity. Another good video that debunks the claims of Rabbinic Judaism is Marching on Zion. 
https://yewtu.be/watch?v=8cVL0ViBB7E

>They literally killed Him over His claim to be equal to God the Father. 
That does not invalidate the fact that the religion was the same. It simply reiterates what we already know, that some Jews refused to see Christ as the messiah and the Son of God. 

>Judaism and Christianity are very distinct religions today
I agree with this, because Rabbinic Judaism is much younger and lacks direct continuity with the 2nd Temple. I just want to emphasis again that for the Apostles, while there was a change in some practices and views within the religion with the coming of Christ, the religion stayed the same. Our worldview is the same, and our worship is directed toward the same God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. We don't say that Abraham and Moses have a different religion from each other just because the pre-incarnate Christ revealed different things to each of them, or that their worship patterns were different, one with an altar outside and one with a tabernacle. So in that respect Christ revealing Himself to the Apostles doesn't change the religion to a distinct separate religion, it simply deepens the fullness of our religion. Everything that the prophets foretold, the apostles believed and witnessed through Christ. This was the acceptance of the faith of their fathers, that the prophets were correct and God is now among them.

>Just ask an orthodox Jew what he thinks about Jesus Christ, Anon.
An orthodox Jew practices Rabbinic Judaism. Again this is a much later reactionary innovation.   

>I'm also skeptical of the claim that believing Christians are somehow 'Israel' today.
>and that we have been "grafted in" as additions, not replacements
The Gentiles were grafted into Israel. Israel is the spiritual body of Christ, the Church. Galatians 3:28-29. This claim that your skeptical about, has being the overwhelming consensus view of Christianity, Protestant, Catholic, and Orthodox, until only recently in the 19th century.

>>25523
Hey you seem to be quite well informed on these things and my interest is in the early Quakers, basically do you know if they have any biblical authority on refusing to call their worshipful meeting houses "churches"?

I know they have expedient reasons for doing so, but I don't really know if they have biblical proofs for doing so. I miss decorations and embellishments and big pipe organs. Also if you're going to have a structure that is not primarily used/owned for humble ploughwork then in what way is it any different from the other buildings whose main function is worship?

Semantic autisimo is not sufficient for me to hold an idea as a divine necessity.

>>25524
To be honest I am not very familiar with the Quakers. You may have to fill me in a bit on this, but I guess I would want to know how they are defining "Church" that they would refuse to use that to define their place of worship? Is it a reaction to the idea of a controlling hand of "Big Church?"

>>25525
Basically this. But they said people who were humble shepherds made better adherents and were used to prophetise more as the result so we should get back to that somehow. Funny thing is I don't know any Quaker groups who even in fine weather would take their meetings outside any more. I assume they view dedicated church buildings as just another ritualist extravagance like all the other Catholic stuff.

It's not an outrage or anything to come to this conclusion it's just that the idea of permanence of a meeting house where it's sole job is a meeting house makes it sound a lot like a church house doesn't it. A lot of them were just accomodating homes that a Quaker lived in, but I think if you're going to have a permanent structure it should be used for humble work foremost and praying in it should be it's secondary purpose. It's that or you're not respecting what the decree was trying to put across.

Modern Quakers are a co-opted white guilt activism worse than Anglican/CofE (maybe "no leadership lol" lets it all get in idk) so the plain conservative variety have retreated to the hills to form tiny pockets that barely hold onto continuity. I should see what happened to the Moravians and see if their outcome has been any better.

If I'm to keep on the topic of the thread and on the original followers from Judea, what other yard sticks besides faith and obedience can be used to measure belief in the first place? I expect good conduct/good works, but I've come from the prostitutes side of converting to Christ and my head is still just a fishbowl full of sin with a bubble of faith in there.