The Bible We may use is combined with Old/New Testament. Some Say Jesus was a Jew became of His Lineage. If I’m to be a follower of Jesus and His Teachings, then I’m also taught to be A Jew.
I must be Jew too, what then is a Christian? I now see a Judeao/Christian follows either way. Sometimes I’m a Jewish Person and sometimes I’m a Christian.
I think Jesus was born anew( Immaculate Conception) with no Jewish Father. He then established The God of Abraham to now be Our Father who like Our Flesh Father Loves Us( We Hope).
This Makes Christians to be Children of the same Father of Jesus. Christian are no longer Children of Israel, but Children of Our Father. Paul in most of His writings refers to “God the Father”’ after He converted.
To take it to the next step, I am a Child of Our Father. I am Baptized like Jesus when I am was aware of it happening.
I then see the Changes in the Teachings that Jesus brought about. To love My Enemy, means to Me I have No Enemies( How can I Love My Enemy?). The most difficult for all Christians is to always Forgive and never punish(Deuteronomy is Full of Punishment). I also want to please Father by not participating in Adult Accepted Behavior, for I never got to be 18 to Gamble, Fornicate, Curse, etc.
I know this is a tough topic, and most may think I’m boring.
That was the original belief before Paul. If you read Paul carefully he separates Judaism and gentiles in terms of obedience to the Law and in several places, e.g. Rom 14, allows for individual beleiifs that contradict the decalogue (keeping the Sabbath)
Secondly our Father is God not Abraham.
Jews see there inheritance as being due to their ancestry, Christians are encouraged to see it as faith in the Death and resurrection of Christ.
There are Judeo Christians, but they are Jews who have embraced Christianity rather than Christians who encorporate Judaism into their beleifs.
The Old Testament points towards Christ using Judaism as a carrier and example. Chirstianity really is a new way, not just a rehashed Judaism. God both approaches and is approachable. There is less emphasis on the mechanics of religion and more upon personal belief and faith and discipleship.
I think the phrase can be (and is) more widely applied to mean any Christian who embraces (or at least does not distance themselves from) the Jewish heritage/lineage of our own current faith. Usually also meaning that we don’t try to dismiss the original covenant and its teachings as having nothing of interest for us to study or know about today. In short - I think most Christians today have no problem identifying as “Judeo-Christians” if somebody asks. Or at least I imagine I know that anecdotally - not because I’ve accessed any actual world-wide data about it (if that exists.) And the vast majority of those never were (nor ever will be) Jewish.
For myself, I think the old testament is valuable because it helps me better understand the new testament, and to better understand our Jewish Savior: Christ, and His teachings.
I was more concerned with practicalities than definitions. Obviously Christians acknowledge the place and relevance of Judaism to our faith but most do not try and embrace the Jewish culture or adherence to the extended law (as in Pharasaic enhancements).
“Immaculate Conception” (in Catholic theology) refers to Mary’s conception, not Jesus’s. For Jesus, the term is virgin birth/virginal conception.
Judeo-Christian usually means Christianity’s roots in Judaism. Christians aren’t Jews ethnically or by Torah-covenant; we’re grafted in to Israel’s promises by faith (Rom 11; Gal 3:29).
Baptism marks union with Christ; it doesn’t make one ethnically Jewish.
“Love your enemies” doesn’t pretend we have none; it calls us to will their good and refuse retaliation (Matt 5:44). Forgiveness and appropriate justice can both be true in Scripture (Matt 18; Rom 13).
Judeao-Christian is refered many times in this US country, I just wonder what it means. It’s confusing to me, for the Bible makes it difficult to distinguish between the two. I can’t eat pork or can I?
Were you around in 1821 when it had this meaning? And given language evolves the current meaning (by your own source in case you didn’t bother to read all of it) is and I quote (ignoring all the other meanings it has taken on between then and now)
I think to extrapolate a little on this, what i read in the biblical theme is that “Gods chosen people” inherit the promise given to Abraham. That promise is salvation/redemption and this is what the gospel ultimately is all about.
Christ made it pretty clear during his ministry i think, that the pharasees and Israelite leadership had corrupted Gods plan for them…they made it a burden. I understand some here may immediately criticise my statement about said burden as applying only to the Old Testament Law. However, the problem there is, God is love…we all known that the 10 commandments are Gods Law of Love…ie they are Love…hence my linking the burden the Isralites made of the law also applying to the Old Testament Gospel.
So, what was the Old Testament Gospel, it was New testament wasnt it? Well no in fact the Gospel was first introduced in the Garden of Eden “I will put emnity between thee and the women, you will strike His heal and he will crush your head”.
The calling of Abraham out of Ur of the Chaldees to the “Land i will shew thee”, refers to the journey to the promised land…that ultimately is the same goal for the post Old Testament “Christian”…it is an example of type/antytype prophesy in action right there. For us the promised land is heaven and the New Jerusalem after the Second Coming. Whilst the Jews do not appear to be looking toward a second coming as such, it still remains within their theology that one day they will enter the promised land. I would agree that Judaism and Christianity probably see the realisation of that differently in that Judaism appears to believe that it means something far more finite…ie some believe the current war in Palestine is aimed at achieving that goal.
Jesus i think made it quite clear however, His kingdom is not of this world! I think the Jews are stuck farther back in the prophecy than Christianity is. We believe that Isaiah 9:6 has been fulfilled, they do not (except the Messianic Jews of course)
There was no need to claim that my use of the term was false and that messianic Jew is correct. Just as thre was no need for you to continue this riddiculous past time of trying to prove that Richard does not know what he is talking about!. Stick to the OP!
@Mervin_Bitikofer answer was quite sufficient and less confrontational.
Perhaps both meanings survive, depending on location and culture. Many words retain more than one meaning, especially between cultures.
Perhaps there is no need to justify a usage.
Perhaps there can be a diversity of both views and understanding, with all the tolerance and acceptance intact.
You may! Unless whatever company you happen to be in would find it offensive. We are never let off the hook from loving those around us. Christ’s higher law of love is always in play - or should be. So in some ways, that is even stricter than the original laws - not only might pork be forbidden you in certain situations, but actually - almost anything could now be forbidden if indulging in it then and there is an unloving act. So while the Christian is declared free from the technicalities of religious law just for law’s sake, we are at the same time now under the dominion of an infinitely higher and infinitely more demanding law. Romans 14 is a good go-to chapter to summarize this.
Maybe you have surveyed the whole world to get your certainty;
Richard
Edit
The formation of Judeo/Christian would suggest an attempt to merge the two rather than just link them, which would seem to be what the OP was suggesting, rather than using the definition you seem to be insisting upon.
