the great Jewish "distress"

[Fenris]

If you wish to discuss this, address the point I made.

If you wish to discuss it, you could start by not demeaning others for holding a different opinion from you. 

[RandyPNW]

If you wish to discuss this, address the point I made.

If you wish to discuss it, you could start by not demeaning others for holding a different opinion from you.

My intention is to show that Christianity displaced Judaism, according to God's plan. That does not demean anything more than the generation of Jews that lived at that time.

I have every hope in the world for the continuance of  the Jewish people, and their exaltation among the pagan nations. But I feel strongly that Christian nations are pursuing the exaltation of their own nations as well.

What I have trouble understanding, in Jewish-Christian relations, is how two religious entities can claim the same God and yet be so different? Perhaps we need to focus more on our commonalities?

[Fenris]

My intention is to show that Christianity displaced Judaism, according to God's plan.

I already know that you believe that. But it's a point of faith, not fact. My faith says otherwise.

I have every hope in the world for the continuance of  the Jewish people, and their exaltation among the pagan nations. But I feel strongly that Christian nations are pursuing the exaltation of their own nations as well.

I'm not certain what you mean by "exaltation " or what your point here is.

What I have trouble understanding, in Jewish-Christian relations, is how two religious entities can claim the same God and yet be so different?

Well, you have an additional 27 books in your bible that aren't in mine. Makes kind of a big difference.

  Perhaps we need to focus more on our commonalities?

Sure, I think that would be wonderful. We are siblings in faith after all.

[RandyPNW]

I'm not certain what you mean by "exaltation " or what your point here is.

My version of Judaism is that it has a "Jewish Hope," which is the completion of a history, ending with the complete removal of Israel's enemies and all oppression. Israel's purpose is to be a testimony of God's righteousness, justice, and love. When Israel is able to do that again, as a nation, they will be exalted among the nations, along with the God they serve.

I apply the same Hope to Gentile nations that have converted to what we believe is the Jewish Messiah, Jesus.

Well, you have an additional 27 books in your bible that aren't in mine. Makes kind of a big difference.

Yes, 27 books written by Jews who believed that Judaism was intended to blossom into a family of many nations, headed by a Messiah who took down the wall separating Jews from those nations who used to be pagans.

Sure, I think that would be wonderful. We are siblings in faith after all.

We serve the same God, and I follow what I believe to be the true Jewish religion, now expanded among the Gentiles. Most importantly, we must pass through the gate that God requires--otherwise, the angels will stop us.

[Fenris]

My version of Judaism is that it has a "Jewish Hope," which is the completion of a history, ending with the complete removal of Israel's enemies and all oppression. Israel's purpose is to be a testimony of God's righteousness, justice, and love. When Israel is able to do that again, as a nation, they will be exalted among the nations, along with the God they serve.

No disagreement with you here. It is what the prophets said, after all.

I apply the same Hope to Gentile nations that have converted to what we believe is the Jewish Messiah, Jesus.

Well this part is obviously unnecessary from my perspective. 

Yes, 27 books written by Jews who believed that Judaism was intended to blossom into a family of many nations, headed by a Messiah who took down the wall separating Jews from those nations who used to be pagans.

Yeah we've been down this road before. Anyway....

We serve the same God, and I follow what I believe to be the true Jewish religion, now expanded among the Gentiles. Most importantly, we must pass through the gate that God requires--otherwise, the angels will stop us.

Don't we have the same vision- to make a world where God can dwell?

[RandyPNW]

My version of Judaism is that it has a "Jewish Hope," which is the completion of a history, ending with the complete removal of Israel's enemies and all oppression. Israel's purpose is to be a testimony of God's righteousness, justice, and love. When Israel is able to do that again, as a nation, they will be exalted among the nations, along with the God they serve.

No disagreement with you here. It is what the prophets said, after all.

I apply the same Hope to Gentile nations that have converted to what we believe is the Jewish Messiah, Jesus.

Well this part is obviously unnecessary from my perspective. 

Yes, 27 books written by Jews who believed that Judaism was intended to blossom into a family of many nations, headed by a Messiah who took down the wall separating Jews from those nations who used to be pagans.

Yeah we've been down this road before. Anyway....

We serve the same God, and I follow what I believe to be the true Jewish religion, now expanded among the Gentiles. Most importantly, we must pass through the gate that God requires--otherwise, the angels will stop us.

Don't we have the same vision- to make a world where God can dwell?

For sure! Thanks.

[Athanasius]

Let's then leave the "personal" stuff out of the conversation, and just deal with the issues raised? But I disagree--the whole issue concerned whether "symbol" should apply to a temple or not. It does not apply in the same way it might to a cross, as an actual, physical symbol. But as a "representation" of something, it is indeed the symbol of the Jewish religion.

The fact I have to explain that repeatedly is something you'll have to deal with. It's not on me.

Leaving the personal stuff out is up to you, since you're the only person bringing it in.

Explaining yourself repeatedly wasn't necessary. You've chosen to explain your use of 'symbol' multiple times, but it's unclear why, as I've already stated that I - or we - understand your use perfectly fine, and continue to disagree with it all the same.

By the way, here's your initial proposition:

"People who were 20 years old at the time Jesus said this, in about 30 AD, would be 60 years old 40 years later, right? That means a relatively large group of people would still be around to see the results of their "generation" in 70 AD, when the Romans destroyed the symbol of their religion, the temple."

You were arguing about the length of a generation, Messianic Jews, etc., when you asserted that the temple was the symbol of 'their [Jewish] religion'. Fenris wasn't attempting to frame anything in any way to avoid your apparently undeniable points. He was, instead, taking issue with your assertion. Attempting to misconstrue a discussion that is in plain view of all is silly and intellectually dishonest.

[RandyPNW]

Let's then leave the "personal" stuff out of the conversation, and just deal with the issues raised? But I disagree--the whole issue concerned whether "symbol" should apply to a temple or not. It does not apply in the same way it might to a cross, as an actual, physical symbol. But as a "representation" of something, it is indeed the symbol of the Jewish religion.

The fact I have to explain that repeatedly is something you'll have to deal with. It's not on me.

Leaving the personal stuff out is up to you, since you're the only person bringing it in.

Explaining yourself repeatedly wasn't necessary. You've chosen to explain your use of 'symbol' multiple times, but it's unclear why, as I've already stated that I - or we - understand your use perfectly fine, and continue to disagree with it all the same.

By the way, here's your initial proposition:

"People who were 20 years old at the time Jesus said this, in about 30 AD, would be 60 years old 40 years later, right? That means a relatively large group of people would still be around to see the results of their "generation" in 70 AD, when the Romans destroyed the symbol of their religion, the temple."

You were arguing about the length of a generation, Messianic Jews, etc., when you asserted that the temple was the symbol of 'their [Jewish] religion'. Fenris wasn't attempting to frame anything in any way to avoid your apparently undeniable points. He was, instead, taking issue with your assertion. Attempting to misconstrue a discussion that is in plain view of all is silly and intellectually dishonest.

Okay, we've had our say. It got a little "hot," and perhaps it's time to let the subject lie, unless you're really interested?