Well, it wasn’t as bad as David Bowie at the Freddie Mercury Concert, which is something.
 Meant that Y’Shua is primarily used by Jews for Jesus types which isn’t the best association for Warren to make when he has been (unfairly?) accused of being a fundamentalist, extremist etc. Hope you’d concede that JfJ isn’t a proper form of Judaism.  Â
I think you’ll find that JfJ is THE proper form of Judaism. If you don’t think that proper Judaism involves recognition of the true Messiah, then why bother calling yourself a Christian?
 Because I’m talking about what Judaism *is* not what Christians think it *should be* . Would refusing to use the term “Hebrew Bible”  or OT – despite their obvious failings as accurate labels – show I’m a bad Christian too? And I’m guessing that most evangelicals don’t regard NT writing on Judaism as a reliable historical source to generalise on Judaism per se so I don’t think I’m saying anything radical here.Â
Ryan, NT Judaism is remarkably like what Judaism is like today–minus the temple and sacrifices. The Pharisees have become the Rabbis (Gedolim actually) of today. The more you read about Modern Judaism, the more you will understand.
 “minus the temple and sacrificies” is a faily big point; I’ve heard academics argue that the impact of the former is such that it could be argued that Judaism *as we know it* is actually younger than Christianity. And I’m assuming even the most “fundamentalist” of Christians would argue that references to the Pharisees in the NT are an accurate generalisation of what the Pharisees were actually like.  And it’s obviously a mischaracterisation to say that Judaism is, to the present day, gagging for a Messiah that was so obviously Jesus.
  I wouldn’t call a Muslim who worshipped Jesus a “real” Muslim on the grounds that he is submitting to God by worshipping Christ, and so too with calling JfJ authentic Judaism.Â
‘Yeshua’ isn’t just a ‘Jewish’ term, it’s Hebrew, it’s for the Israelites, the children of Abraham. The children of Abraham rejoice and be glad at the Christ’s coming.
“If you were Abraham’s children, you would be doing the works Abraham did, but now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. This is not what Abraham did. You are doing the works your father [the devil] did.”
“Your father Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day. He saw it and was glad.”
John 8:39-41; 56 (taking just the ‘words in red’).
I am no theologian/historian, but the Pharisees seem to have been invented in Babylonian exile. I would argue that it was in exile that Judaism changed into the form it has to this day. The Temple was no more at that time, so it faded in importance–even though it was rebuilt later. (The second thing that happened was that the Jews abandoned their love for idolatry. God never had to deal with this again after they came out of exile.)
It was in Babylon where the Talmud (the “definitive” Jewish interpretation of the Torah) was written. It (the so-called “Oral Torah”) emerged as a significant modifier of the meaning–and often the plain text–of the Bible.
Jesus called the Pharisees out on this (saying their traditions voided the word of God), so it is obvious that they had been doing this for some time by the time Jesus arrived. Before Babylon, as far as I know, there were no Pharisees.
This divide is between “Biblical Judaism” and “Rabbinic Judaism”. You should read up on the Karaites–a group who rejects the Talmud/”Oral Torah”. (The “Sola Scriptura” position of the Jewish World).
This “divide” popped up again centuries later when Jews who had not been exiled (such as those who lived in Africa) were later re-united with modern Jews in Israel; and neither could understand why the other was doing what they were doing. The ones who had not been exiled were still doing the sacrifices.
Â
 I know a little of the history of the Talmud and I don’ t think you’ve characterised it fairly; endevouring to understand the 613 laws in the post AD 70 laws is hardly ungodly tradition. It should be “Tanakh Judaism” instead of “Bible Judaism” too, surely? And looking up a Jewish sect is hardly going to convince me that another Jewish sect – Jews for Jesus – is legitimate, mainstream Judaism (from an evangelical perspective : surely Jews who accept Christ become Christians, no more or less, and therefore hardly need to keep Jewish festivals *especially* if they arose from tradtition than scripture?).  Much of this arises from my distate for popular evangelical stuff tha claims chrisianity is the best/only true religion because of “grace” and the Jews are just legalistic ec.  You don’t – or at least shouldn’t – proclaim the supremacy of Christ via mischaracterising other religions.Â
Wouldn’t it be great if this happened in British Elections.
For a different take on the inauguration go here
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=HplZ_taHXLM&feature=related
WARNING! You might seriously die laughing watching this…..
 Felt it started well with the Sh’ma but it soon decended into rubbish with the Yeshua stuff.Â
Heh! What did you think of the benediction?
Ryan,
Actually, that was very clever. Jesus is known as Isa and Y’Shua, but the only Jesus who taught the Lord’s Prayer is the one found in the Gospels.
TAG – You mean Robinson’s meanderings? Shame about the microphone being off…
 Well, it wasn’t as bad as David Bowie at the Freddie Mercury Concert, which is something.
 Meant that Y’Shua is primarily used by Jews for Jesus types which isn’t the best association for Warren to make when he has been (unfairly?) accused of being a fundamentalist, extremist etc. Hope you’d concede that JfJ isn’t a proper form of Judaism.  Â
Â
Ryan,
I think you’ll find that JfJ is THE proper form of Judaism. If you don’t think that proper Judaism involves recognition of the true Messiah, then why bother calling yourself a Christian?
 Because I’m talking about what Judaism *is* not what Christians think it *should be* . Would refusing to use the term “Hebrew Bible”  or OT – despite their obvious failings as accurate labels – show I’m a bad Christian too? And I’m guessing that most evangelicals don’t regard NT writing on Judaism as a reliable historical source to generalise on Judaism per se so I don’t think I’m saying anything radical here.Â
Ryan, NT Judaism is remarkably like what Judaism is like today–minus the temple and sacrifices. The Pharisees have become the Rabbis (Gedolim actually) of today. The more you read about Modern Judaism, the more you will understand.
 “minus the temple and sacrificies” is a faily big point; I’ve heard academics argue that the impact of the former is such that it could be argued that Judaism *as we know it* is actually younger than Christianity. And I’m assuming even the most “fundamentalist” of Christians would argue that references to the Pharisees in the NT are an accurate generalisation of what the Pharisees were actually like.  And it’s obviously a mischaracterisation to say that Judaism is, to the present day, gagging for a Messiah that was so obviously Jesus.
  I wouldn’t call a Muslim who worshipped Jesus a “real” Muslim on the grounds that he is submitting to God by worshipping Christ, and so too with calling JfJ authentic Judaism.Â
‘Yeshua’ isn’t just a ‘Jewish’ term, it’s Hebrew, it’s for the Israelites, the children of Abraham. The children of Abraham rejoice and be glad at the Christ’s coming.
“If you were Abraham’s children, you would be doing the works Abraham did, but now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth that I heard from God. This is not what Abraham did. You are doing the works your father [the devil] did.”
“Your father Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day. He saw it and was glad.”
John 8:39-41; 56 (taking just the ‘words in red’).
I am no theologian/historian, but the Pharisees seem to have been invented in Babylonian exile. I would argue that it was in exile that Judaism changed into the form it has to this day. The Temple was no more at that time, so it faded in importance–even though it was rebuilt later. (The second thing that happened was that the Jews abandoned their love for idolatry. God never had to deal with this again after they came out of exile.)
It was in Babylon where the Talmud (the “definitive” Jewish interpretation of the Torah) was written. It (the so-called “Oral Torah”) emerged as a significant modifier of the meaning–and often the plain text–of the Bible.
Jesus called the Pharisees out on this (saying their traditions voided the word of God), so it is obvious that they had been doing this for some time by the time Jesus arrived. Before Babylon, as far as I know, there were no Pharisees.
This divide is between “Biblical Judaism” and “Rabbinic Judaism”. You should read up on the Karaites–a group who rejects the Talmud/”Oral Torah”. (The “Sola Scriptura” position of the Jewish World).
This “divide” popped up again centuries later when Jews who had not been exiled (such as those who lived in Africa) were later re-united with modern Jews in Israel; and neither could understand why the other was doing what they were doing. The ones who had not been exiled were still doing the sacrifices.
Â
 I know a little of the history of the Talmud and I don’ t think you’ve characterised it fairly; endevouring to understand the 613 laws in the post AD 70 laws is hardly ungodly tradition. It should be “Tanakh Judaism” instead of “Bible Judaism” too, surely? And looking up a Jewish sect is hardly going to convince me that another Jewish sect – Jews for Jesus – is legitimate, mainstream Judaism (from an evangelical perspective : surely Jews who accept Christ become Christians, no more or less, and therefore hardly need to keep Jewish festivals *especially* if they arose from tradtition than scripture?).  Much of this arises from my distate for popular evangelical stuff tha claims chrisianity is the best/only true religion because of “grace” and the Jews are just legalistic ec.  You don’t – or at least shouldn’t – proclaim the supremacy of Christ via mischaracterising other religions.Â