Do Jews go to heaven?

I have two points to make.

First, I think prior to Christ, that may have been a time when only one people had a prayer of salvation, provided, as even now, if you followed God. If you were/are a rotten hateful person, you probably don't have much of a shot. As for the auguments, (even bibical text) that appear to some people to say the new covenant broke the old, these references are regarding specific people, not every last person of the Jewish faith, so think about that. It really doesn't prove anything, and throughout the old testament there were instances of God's chosen people losing favor with him on and off, but the faithful always existed and they were never forgotten, nor will his chosen people ever lose that standing.

My second thought involves this constant invoking of the idea you can only come to God/salvation through Christ. This I believe, but not to an extent where I would presume to know exactly what Christ meant by that. By defining that belief with a set of man's criteria (like this whole debate I always see over faith vs. works) well, you might be missing something.

How do any of us know what that entails, what God can do, what Christ meant. Plain and simple, you can't. There are passages all over the bible that contradict each other if you try to use them that way. God is all powerful, and his ways are not our ways and we cannot understand them all, but if anything should be clear, it is this, he has a plan and it excludes no one, unless we exclude Him. (You know, that free will thing.)

@ Valhall

For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour;
Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth.
For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;
Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.

All men will be saved and they will come unto the knowledge of the truth.

It's pretty plain and clear.

Why would the word 'aionion' be used when the word for 'forever' is 'panta' or 'pantote?'

I had a discussion the other day with Spamandham about where the words 'faith,' 'knowledge' and 'belief' should be used in the English language. Of course, he was right - but in Greece the word 'pisti' or 'pisteuo' is used to mean both faith and belief, which is why it's difficult for me as a Greek person to make the distinction based upon a translation. Translations often convey the correct meaning, but in this case - the translation is innaccurate.

The word 'aiona' has always meant century, the word 'aiones' has always meant centuries and the word 'aionion' has always meant for centuries to come.

I don't understand how people are arguing with a Greek person over the use of a Greek word. I thought the wise were supposed to appreciate correction?

Originally posted by Relentless If you were/are a rotten hateful person, you probably don't have much of a shot.

i certainly hope you don't mean me?

My second thought involves this constant invoking of the idea you can only come to God/salvation through Christ.

this is stated quite plainly.

How do any of us know what that entails, what God can do, what Christ meant. Plain and simple, you can't.

but you can?

"The rulers of the Jews knew that He was the Messiah: and if there was any ignorance in them it was affected ignorance. Therefore their sin was the most grievous, both on account of the kind of sin as well as from the malice of their will" - Thomas Aquinas


the karaites are the only vestige of the ancient israelites. this tiny sect has chosen to live as god commanded, without the talmud or christ. they follow the old testament. they are hated and severely persecuted by the adherants of judaism. why? because judaism is talmudism, not old testament.

Originally posted by Nagell
i certainly hope you don't mean me?

Why would you even think that? I am not here to judge anyone - that is God's department.

My second thought involves this constant invoking of the idea you can only come to God/salvation through Christ.

this is stated quite plainly.

It's the how of the "through Christ" I question man's interpretation on.

How do any of us know what that entails, what God can do, what Christ meant. Plain and simple, you can't.

but you can?

I clearly state I do not. I allow my trust in God and my faith to take care of these things, without ever thinking that anyone can tell us who and who doesn't make it to heaven. For instance who's to say that Christ doesn't intervene at the moment of death to allow fulfillment of this? Only those who attempt to interpret with finality one line from the Bible without recognizing the limits of our finite ability to understand God's plan.

Originally posted by kinglizard
Many times I agree with what you say JJ but I just don't understand how you think we can find salvation without Christ.


John 14:6

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

All I got to say about that passage is that dude Jesus was a little full of himself.

Also in this day and age how can they denie A jew or any good person entry to heaven (if it exsists) surerly if they denie them they can just go to the heavens equvilant of the human rights and get in that way as there rights are being abused lol no one above the law (Least what i been told )lol

Since i believe that all religions are basically worship of the same god then it is possible for the christians/muslims etc teachings to be incorrect in the way to enter heaven........If it exsists i belive you only need to be decent good willed and overall a honest person. I do not belive that you will be victomised for not believeing or following someone that I personally do not believe exsists.

That my point of view anyway.

Originally posted by Simon_the_byron


I don't understand how people are arguing with a Greek person over the use of a Greek word. I thought the wise were supposed to appreciate correction?

Don't take a defensive position, it doesn't further the conversation any. First, I'm not arguing with you on the translation issue, I pointed out that you used an example of an English word that has now come to have two meanings, but not always did. And I pointed out that with, as you put it, "all the ancient greek tools" using a translation other than what you are applying, there might be an ancient dual meaning that they know about and you don't. I've based that on the notion that being Greek doesn't make you omniscient, and therefore there could be knowledge you don't yet have on this. That's not argument - old wise one - that's discussion and consideration. I'm considering this point = > see, this is my considering face

Originally posted by Relentless
First, I think prior to Christ, that may have been a time when only one people had a prayer of salvation, provided, as even now, if you followed God.

as i have stated earlier, the jews turned away from god when they denied christ. for roughly 2000 years they have followed the man-made tradition of talmudism.

what does the talmud say about christ:

on the website of the orthodox jewish, chabad-lubavitch(one of the largest and most powerful jewish organizations in the world) we find the following-

"The Talmud (Babylonian Edition) records other sins of 'Jesus the Nazarene.' 1. 'He and his disciples practiced sorcery and black magic, led jews astray into idolatry, and were sponsored by foreign, gentile powers for the purpose of subverting Jewish worship (Sanhedrin 43a).

2."He was sexually immoral, worshipped statues of stone (a brick is mentioned), was cut off from the Jewish people for his wickedness, and refused to repent (Sanhedrin 107b; Sotah 47a)

3."He learned witchcraft in Egypt... (Shabbos 104b)"

for christians, the essence of the human being is the soul, for jews it is the body, hence their worship of their own race as a type of god.

augustine, in his Tractatus adversus Judeos declared rabbinic judaism to be the counterfeit of true israel. augustine declared that judaism was "Israel according to the flesh", carnal israel.

proof of this can be found in the judaic view on virginity. the rabbi's forbid it.

*

"Anyone who does not copulate it is if he had spilled blood (Yebamot 63b. Shulhan Arukh, Even HaEzer 1:1)."

*

"If a grown-up man has intercourse with a little girl, it is nothing, for having intercourse with a girl less than three years old is like putting a finger in the eye(Ketubot 11b)."

Originally posted by Nagell

*

"If a grown-up man has intercourse with a little girl, it is nothing, for having intercourse with a girl less than three years old is like putting a finger in the eye(Ketubot 11b)."

You've either shown your outright ignorance, or your blatant hatred.

You pick.

The source for the charge that Judaism permits child molestation is a passage from the
Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Ketubot, pg. 11b:
רמאק יכה אבר רמא , םולכ אלו הנטקה לע אבה לודג
ימד ןיעב עבצא ןתונכ ןאכמ תוחפד .
Rava [a fourth century Rabbinic authority] said: If an adult has sex with a
girl under the age of three, it is ignored, for it is like putting a finger in
someone’s eye [i.e., tears may drip from the eye but there will always be
more tears to replace them; so too the hymen of a girl so young may break
but it will heal].
From this quote, anti-Semites argue that Judaism permits the sexual molestation of young
girls. This, however, is not true. In fact, in several places the Talmud makes clear that
Judaism possesses its own version of the American law of statutory rape. A formulation
of this law may be found in the Babylonian Talmud, Tractate Yevamot, pg. 33b:
והנינ סנוא הנטק יותיפ .
One who seduces an underage girl is considered as if he had raped her [i.e.,
the laws applicable to rapists would apply to the molester].
An honest reading of the passage from Ketubot shows that it is part of a technical
discussion regarding the evaluation of a woman’s ketubah – a reverse dowry that Jewish
law requires a man to pay his wife in the event of divorce. A major factor in the
determination of the ketubah in traditional Jewish law is whether the woman had been a
virgin at the time of the marriage; virginity is considered a positive value that would
enable the woman to claim a higher ketubah. The quoted passage indicates that if a girl
had been molested before the age of three, she is still considered a virgin and is entitled to
the higher ketubah. In no way does the passage or the discussion in Ketubot imply that it
is permissible for Jewish men to molest young girls.
8
That anti-Semites have taken the passage from Ketubot out of context and ignored
Judaism’s law against statutory rape demonstrates their true agenda: to instill others with
hatred for Judaism and Jewish people.

www.adl.org...

Don't fuss too much about which one you pick. They're both disgusting to me.

[edit on 12-1-2005 by Valhall]

John 14:6

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

No One, what about many, as in an entire religious group, such as the jews?

Originally posted by spacedoubt
John 14:6

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

No One, what about many, as in an entire religious group, such as the jews?

I don't think that reconciliation works. An entire religious group is composed of individuals, or "one"s. In order for an entire group to come to the Father, each individual would have to be able to come to the Father.

JJ,

I see what you are saying..
But could ONE be interpreted as "someone without others" or a person who is spiritually alone..
Not really sure how to put it, but I'm sure you catch my drift..

John 14:6

Jesus answered, "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.

Again, I feel that this question of "Do Jews go to heaven?" is soley given from a Christian perspective. And again, I would argue that applying Christian interpretation and the Christian Bible and scripture to the Jewish condition and/or people is unjustified in that it does not adequately cover the Jewish perspective and interpretation.

I provided one link already concerning the Jewish perspective on heaven, etc., I wish to take liberty to do so with this above quoted Christian Biblical scripture verse:

The Christ figure in the New Testament (John 14) declares, "No man cometh to the Father except through me." In Judaism, no one come to the Father except through the self. So begin with yourself.

The Individual In The Jew







seekerof

Seeker, the conversation's taking place where many here have different assumptions than yourself. If one believes Christianity is the truth, and not just a truth, then it doesn't matter what the Jews believe will happen. I did read that link you provided, and it really appears the Jews don't know what will happen. There are things like that in Christianity, too, where many have theories as to how to interpret something, but no one knows for sure yet. From a Unitarian perspective, your point is a good one. From a Christian perspective, it is not. In Christianity, there is only one truth, whereas a Unitarian believes there are many truths, or multiple paths to the truth (depending on who you talk to).

Also, if you look at the initial post, it is phrased in such a way as to be asking if, according to the complete Judaism (Christianity), can those who missed the fulfillment of their faith make it into heaven.

Originally posted by truthseeka
This is something I was thinking about while trying to figure out the connection between Judaism and Christianity.

Are Jews, despite not being Christians, allowed into heaven?

Finally, for those who did read through the link you provided, it was a very thorough and well balanced account of Jewish beliefs. After reading through it, I didn't feel there was much more to add from the Jewish perspective.

Spacedoubt: Actually...no...No I don't...

EDIT: Oh, wait, yes I do. Sorry, didn't get enough sleep last night or something. Maybe the idiot ray is shining down on my head As to the response, I suspect not. According to that lexicon I linked to, the word Oudeis that is used in the greek means "no one, nothing" (emphesis added). The second part doesn't mesh with what you're putting forward. Do I have an alternate explanation, though? Not at all. I know what 2 Kings 2 says, and I know what John 14:6 says...It's difficult making them work together and remain consistant, although a friend of mine did put forward a strong argument for the end of the old covenant today. More on that when I wake up tomorrow

[edit on 12-1-2005 by junglejake]

Edit 'cause JJ woke up




[edit on 1-12-2005 by spacedoubt]

Originally posted by junglejake
If one believes Christianity is the truth, and not just a truth, then it doesn't matter what the Jews believe will happen.

Again, such a mention is from a Christian perspective, implying that the only way to truth, the light, to God is only through Christianity and Jesus Christ. Question: was Jesus a self-professed Christian? Did he even have a religion? Is God a Christian? More and more, I am coming to find that the Christian notion and way is exclusive instead of being inclusive.

I would beg to differ that it does matter to the Jews, because it is the Jews that are being damned or saved by a/the Christian interpretation, the Christian way, and the Christian Bible, which incidentally, the Old Testament is derived from the Jewish TaNaK: aka: Hebrew Bible. The Jews have their own perspective, their own Holy Scriptures, and to apply Christian morality and to hazard conjecture on salvation and damned questions concerning them is unjust, to me anyhow.

Personally, to me, I try to live a life as fit and as good as possible, never hoping to achieve the example set by Christ. My attitude to death is that until it happens, I will neither damn or hazard conjecture about anyone else's soul or possible damnation. In the end, as much as many Christians hate to admit such, no one knows till that day comes when our physical eyes close for the last time, and quite frankly, I do not know of many who are seeking to find out if there is life after to death or if there is a heaven or hell. And if they were, they certainly will not be coming back to let anyone know of it.

This Jew question is perplexing and one sided in perspective.
Just my thoughts anyhow.






seekerof

Seeker, I agree, it is coming from a Christian perspective. I believe Christianity is correct, so if I were to address the issue in a Unitarian manner, I would be lying. My answers are going to come from a Christian world view because I have a Christian world view. I could argue from another perspective, but then would I be being honest?

I agree this is one sided in perspective. Does that make it wrong, though? If we were talking about math instead of religion, and the question was posed:

Can x * x = y * x Where
x y
x 0

If I were to respond saying no, it is not possible. You can divide each side of the equasion by x and get x = y, but the conditions state that x cannot equal y. Biased with one perspective? Yeah, that of the truth of mathmatics. I believe Christianity is the Truth. If it turns out I'm right...What does it matter what the Jews believe, what the Hindus believe, or what the Muslims believe? If it turns out they're all wrong, what does it matter what they believe happens to them when they die? A four year old may think it makes perfect sense that 2 + 2 could be 5. Does that mean you and I have to consider that, discuss it, and give it fair time in a debate about math?

Was Jesus a Christian? No, He was a Jew. So am I; I just believe in the full Word of God, not just the preamble.

I believe that Jews can attain Paradise. In fact, an awful lot of Christians are going to be very surprised to learn whom they meet in the afterworld admd whom they do not, at least the ones who attain an afterlife will.

At the risk of starting that whole Catholic's are not Christian thing again, as viewed by many protestant christians..... oh well, this may be a good time to separate the two.

Catholics do not see this issue as stated by many presenting this issue as a christian perspective.

From the Catholic Catechism on the subject of the Jewish people (and these references are based on bibcal text):

219 - God loves his people more than a bridegroom his beloved; his love will be victorious over even the worst infidelities and will extend to his most precious gift: "God so loved the world that he gave his only Son.

220 - God's love is "everlasting": "For the mountains may depart and the hills be removed, but my steadfast love shall not depart from you." Through Jeremiah, God declares to his people, "I have loved you with an everlasting love; therefore I have continued my faithfulness to you."

Nowhere in the new testatment is this ever specifically - and I mean specifically - revoked. Some may interpret certain statements as revoking this, but I would have to err on the side of caution here and not go that far as to presume that "everlasting love" as proclaimed from the horses mouth should be considered changeable.

In the words of many Christians who defend their interpretations of specific bibical texts as proof of their particular beliefs via the belief that if it isn't true than God lied.....well, then you really have to rethink some of this in those terms I would think.

In the Catholic tradition no one entered the Kingdom of Heaven between the time of Adam and the death of Christ. However the departed faithful were in a place waiting for this event and prior to Christ's resurrection, one of the things that happened was Christ went to this place to bring them to the paradise that awaited them, the Kingdom of Heaven with God their Father.

A few other points from the Catholic perspective as interpreted by moi, (and of course I flatly acknowledge I now run the same risk of not having the complete understanding of God's plan) are this. For the people of Israel who "missed" the Messiah, this was due to being misled by leaders who for all intents and purposes led them astray. I think this will be taken into consideration by a God who made a promise to his people that was to be everlasting. Just as there are many christians and catholics who are led astray today by their leaders. Nothing should be ruled out in God's plan by man's interpretation as to the infinate possibilities of how all promises are to be fulfilled. Then of course we have the belief of the triune nature of God. The "except through me" notion can be debated as me being the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, opening the door to further possibilities of salvation. Finally, though there is an awful lot of things that matter in terms of salvation in "this life" I do not see anywhere that any promises made by God in the bible exclude the final outcome of the promises being fulfilled in the earthly existance. None of us can be sure of what occurs on the other side, but if you acknowledge existance does not end with earthly death, it seems to me that the fulfillment of these promises may be something that occurs beyond that point. For all we know.....who really knows?

God is a Holy God who can’t and won’t allow sin into His Presence. Think of it this way:
Imagine a child who goes outside and plays in the mud. When it’s time to come inside, the parent sees all that dirty wet mud all over his body and clothes and doesn’t want it to be tracked all through the house. So he says to the child, “Take off your clothes and let me hose you off first.”
After the child is clean, he can come inside.

That is similar to how God views our sin. We must take off our dirty clothes (sin). If we don’t rely on Christ’s Righteousness for our “cleanliness” we are still “dirty” in God’s sight.
Yes, He still loves us for all of eternity, but since we are unclean, He cannot allow us into His House”.

We must be "hosed off" with the shed Blood of Christ.

Isaiah 64:6
"All of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags; we all shrivel up like a leaf, and like the wind our sins sweep us away."


Hebrews 9:13-15 "The blood of goats and bulls and the ashes of a heifer sprinkled on those who are ceremonially unclean sanctify them so that they are outwardly clean. 14How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God!
15For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance—now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant."

[edit on 12/2/2005 by just me 2]

Originally posted by just me 2
God is a Holy God who can’t and won’t allow sin into His Presence. Think of it
15For this reason Christ is the mediator of a new covenant, that those who are called may receive the promised eternal inheritance—now that he has died as a ransom to set them free from the sins committed under the first covenant."

[edit on 12/2/2005 by just me 2]

Yes, but this has nothing to do with the Everlasting Covenant. The "first covenant" referenced above is the covenant made between God and the Israelites based on their adherance to his 10 commandments.

The everlasting covenant was an unconditional promise God made to the Israelite people based on the faithfulness of Abraham. There was nothing else required for it to last forever as far people were concerned, but required love and faithfulness on the individual level. There was no law that needed to be kept in order for the everlasting covenant to be kept. It was basically one-sided and given by God.

Christ did nothing to change or replace this covenant made by God to the Israelites. And I believe this covenant will be met by God when the Messiah comes and the Israelites are given a second chance to see that Jesus is the Messiah.

That's how the reconciliation between the Everlasting Covenant and the requirement of a belief in Christ will be completed...IMHO.


[edit on 12-2-2005 by Valhall]