Excellent! What a foolishness, to compare the Incarnation with the semi-gods of paganism! Those were invented by men, but people couldn't invent a notion of God-man as revealed by the NT! People couldn't understand that notion. How can we say he invented it? Very good the OT argumentation of more than one Person in the Godhead!
A difficult verse. It is interesting that from the all Bible commentaries I have in my home no one discusses with seriousness (some do not mention the problem) the problem of this verse - Matthew 12:40.
Great lesson. It is interesting that the Jews do not accept the progressive revelation of God in the NT, but accept the progressive "revelation" in the Talmud and the Mishna, by which they interpret the OT - so they add to the OT. At the same time, how can they say that they believe that the Law is eternal, and still do not continue with the Temple and the sacrifices?
Great arguments. Biblical argumentation. Fallen man cannot obey perfectly the Law of God. The comment by James Wood is no response: he didn't say on what basis can God forgive sins. JW's view of sin and God's holiness is wrong.
Great insight. I see a similar problem in the New Perspective in Paul. They start not from the OT, but from the intertestamental rabbinic Judaism and want to argue that Jesus came to fulfill the expectations of the Jews, expectations based not on the OT, but on the intertestamental writings, which departed from the OT.
Judaism not OT religion. Great observation: Christianity is not the fulfillment of the Judaism of the Rabbies, who modified the OT teaching, but Christianity is the fulfillment and the completion of the OT. Christianity is not the fulfillment of a Judaism which seeks to reach God without a Mediator.
Great Sermon! struggle with some of the theology, he contends that the Judaism certain people want to continue is one separate from the O.T,(the one mentioned to which Peter responds), yet this before oral tradition was properly written down as was mentioned in a previous sermon, therefore it seems the Judaism those people speak of is the Judaism they and the disciples and Jesus, incidentally, grew up with, the heart of the Old Testament! Maybe Asher NOrman is not reading the right Bible and oral tradition is not rooted in the Old testament but I am sure it is likely that he has spent time in Exodus where a lot of oral tradition is based on. If Judaism is so removed from the Old Testament, why and what are all these laws about that God gave the Jewish , yes Jewish people in Exodus and similar books? because they are certainly not Christianity. Several books are devoted to these laws, and I contend they are what is referred to when people allude to them in the New Testament. I contend that while Jesus may have disagreed with points of oral law, it did not mean he disagreed and did not keep it, as evidenced by his knowledge and keeping of it in other parts of Bible. I post this with total respect to the preacher and Christianity, sincere and well intentioned,bt pls understand judaism better...:(
Faith is not required... Your response to this subject is flawed... Of course it is impossible to obey perfectly. Every parent knows this. But when a sin is committed God provided forgiveness. When your child sins the first time do you immediately condemn him or her?
Also "Kiss the son" is not a valid translation of the Hebrew "Bar Nesqu". It actually means "Embrace purity". Bar is Aramaic not Hebrew for son (Hebrew is "ben".) There is no Aramaic in the Psalms only Hebrew. I am sorry but your arguments are in error.