Islam, Muslim / Christian Forum - Welcome All

There seems to be much about the New Testament you don't know in terms of its development.
You probably don't even know that there is not a single epistle where the writer called Paul mentions his name of Saul or that he studied under Rabban Gamliel in Jerusalem when Jesus would have been an active preacher, making not the slightest reference to knowing about him despite both men being the same age.
You probably don't know how various manuscripts indicate changes in verses in GMark and other gospels. Or that the first text to discuss the doctrine of the trinity is Tertullian.
Or that the author of the epistles contradicts himself, so clearly as in Galatians itself when he first says that Christ revealed himself to him but then says that God did it after he was separated from the womb despite the fact of other apostles who existed before him and who never had the revelation from the Christ.

Perhaps you have difficulty reading English. I never said that people who do not believe like me are not Jews. However, just as you do, I believe people are IN ERROR. Jews have been subject to 64 years of incessant Zionist propaganda accompanied by all the bribery and other means of ensuring support, mainly through FEAR MONGERING. But it's not a big deal. This "state" with all its murder, idolatry and immorality will come to an end with its desecration of the Torah and the name of God.

This is totally unimportant. No one invited a massive influx of Zionist colonists into the Holy Land at the expense of the people already living there. And as far as identity is concerned, where did AMERICANS come from? Where did the Afrikaaners come from? Where did Canadians come from? The point is not where people come from but how they treat each other.

Well, you can't have it both ways. Either you want to talk about Zionism as the active political movement started by that jerk Herzl, may his name rot in hell, or you can talk about other groups who simply wanted Jews to follow the Torah loyally without political aspirations of worldly western hedonism. When you get your back against the wall, you jump back 100 years further.

All you do is speak in abstractions and cannot even apply what you think you believe in to actual events on the ground as I have described them. Life is more than vain abstractions.

What restoration? With the highest abortion rates, Mafias,  gay rights and nothing but violence and desecration of that we hold sacred? We were thrown out for far less. Don't you see what's going on? Some restoration! Desecrating G-d's name! The miserable Zionist state is a wicked antinomian heresy!!

Except that despite the fact that you know so little Jewish history, Hebrew, Aramaic or how Judaism works you fulfill the verse referring to stiffnecked people!! How can a person be so stiffnecked when he cannot even be conversant in the subject of dispute. Even Jerome and Augustine and later commentators learned Hebrew well to be able to discuss these matters.

I don't think you read properly. I wasn't saying anyone BELIEVED in the NT Jesus but was talking about believing he EXISTED.
And no, the rabbis I know who are familiar with this subject do not believe the Jesus of the NT ever existed. They agree that the person in the NT was modeled after Yeshu ben Joseph Pandera of the Talmud who was hanged after stoning on the eve of Passover not for pretending to be a messiah but for teaching heretical ideas and deceiving the Jews. It changed into a messianic story long after the fact. Satisfied now??

There is no sense in getting aggravated. And I REPEAT: I was not talking about WORSHIPPING Mary. I was talking about ANY mention of the mother who gave birth to Christ as a miracle of the virgin birth, period. There is no sense in avoiding the other issues: that the epistles make no mention of the Baptist or of Pilate, or the storylines and aphorisms contained in the gospels. Or a nativity story, or Judas, etc. etc. Now don't get mad, just think about it. Nothing is mentioned even in passing like any good pastor would do in giving a sermon to his flock. Nothing in all of the thousands of words of all those epsitles. Nothing of Isaiah 53 or Malachi 3 or 4 concerning an Elijah figure.

The gospels say different things about a man whose existence in the first century is not credible.
Even the Pauline epistles do not identify his Jesus with the Baptist or Pilate in the first century.  The epistles say nothing about these verses and say nothing about Malachi or Isaiah messianic prophecies at all, including Isaiah 53. That is because the epistles exhibit a religious tradition different from that of the gospels which themselves differ on traditions and beliefs. Not to mention the Epistle to the Hebrews which introduces a different typology again.

I think you take things too seriously. Of course the author GMatthew or any other book can apply whatever ideas he wants. After all, the entire Tanakh was available in his Greek languages. What's the big deal.
But you should see all the scriptural references used by the Sabbateans to show that Shabtai Zvi WAS the real Messiah. There is no end to these exercises when there isn't a strict tradition of teachings on all these matters. As we say, Eyn Ledavar Sof - There is no end to the matter.

Sorry, Peter. You can accuse me of being dense. But I really do not get the gist of your question here, no matter how loudly you should in large fonts.

How do you know they "knew" all the aspects of his exclusive gospel when it took 300 years to figure out the nature of the Christ and his persons??
Do you have any evidence that anyone ever received a letter from Paul? Did they reply? Who were the recipients? Wherer did they live? You don't know because no one knows. They simply take it on faith that the recipients got such letters and they knew everything except what Paul decided to include in the letters. Except that your average pastor when he gives sermons he always reminds people of what they already know??
Anyway, in the Torah a "maiden" (whether virgin or not) is called a NAARA. But you will never find a specific designation of a virgin as anything solely other than BETULA.  A bachur is always assumed to be a "virgin."
"Bachurim vegam betulot......." with "Zkenim im Ne'arim......" in psalms.

And the question is not whether a specific miracle CAN happen, but whether there is reliability that it DID happen. There is no record anywhere in the midrashim or Talmud or Zohar or anywhere else of a virgin birth of Yeshu or anybody else. Now a miracle like that would be something worth mentioning. But it isn't there because it never happened. As a matter of fact IF IT HAD, why didn't the gospels of Mark and John mention it, and why didn't the Pauline epistles ever talk about it? Gosh, such a huge piece of information about Mary ignored by the epistles! Paul doesn't even mention her name a single time!