BS"D

Personally there are many things I agree with that he says and this happens to be of those with which I vehemently disagree.

It is not up to us to "reclaim" or "understand" the gods of other people.   No good can come of trying to force somebody else's god into our cultural understanding IMHO.  It is best AFAIK to follow the advice of our sages to not meddle with the traditions of other peoples or seek to reinterpret them so that they become acceptable to us.  

As Jews we learn that a people's divine revelation is sacred to them and we have nothing we can add to or detract from it (unless, of course, it exists primarily to murder other peoples and destroy Creation as some sectarians seem to support.)

May 1, 2012 -- 9:07PM, rocketjsquirell wrote:

I have no present intention of reading the book. Schmuley is a celebrity, not a serious scholar.

BS"D

As he is a rabbi to many in Hollywood, so to them he is their only scholar and as such his influence should not be easily dismissed.   And the fact that non-Jews are aware of his works makes it all that more important IMHO to respond to his claims whether they arise from serious scholarship or simple political appeasement (as appears to be the case here.) 

i think the issue is a difficult one. if one could learn more about "jesus" without becoming mired in the theology which has sprouted around jesus, then maybe, as some scholarly and historical exercise, learning about jesus could be useful. what is important to note is that the wisdom in the traditional christian texts was often imported from jewish texts so there is not as much as one might think that can be gained from reading the gospels (and is difficult to learn more about jesus without going through the gospels as there is a paucity of verifiable contemporary corroboration which adds anything to the understanding beyond simple claims to historicity).

May 2, 2012 -- 8:22AM, Lilwabbit wrote:

I haven't found anything in the Tanakh that states such teachings with such clarity and hence I think it is justifiable for Christians to regard them as new. ....

Kind regards,

LilWabbit

BS"D

That is a good point.  But anyone who studies Jewish texts (such as Talmud for example) will readily see that such notions are not new by any stretch of the imagination.  Nevertheless it is a curious question that has been raised about the Jewish text as well - is the text identical to the people - and by extension - is the god identical to the text?

I believe all peoples should learn about the sacred texts of others to know the good that is their potential.  But to pit one people against the other is fostering hatred IMHO. 

Rather than claiming uniqueness for a religious text which is impossible to prove I prefer to use the good behaviors of individuals and groups to demonstrate the goodness that can come from a people and their holy text.   That good behavior is what is truly unique about any people IMHO.

May 1, 2012 -- 7:13PM, chanceuse wrote:

Hi again!

I'm presently reading Rabbi Schmuley Boteach's new book "Kosher Jesus" and am finding it interesting.
I was just wondering if any of you on this forum agree with him that Jews should learn more about Jesus because he was one of your own.

I disagree. As the saying goes: If it's true, it ain't new. If it's new, it ain't true.

There is nothing of worth in Christianity (same for Islam) that did not proceed it/them in Judaism and does not exist in Judaism.