@C0jtr013r
So if I understand you correctly, you believe that the "name" Elohim is more holy than the tetragrammaton? Or is it different depending on what language you write it in? Or if you speak it?
No. The Divine Name is the most holy of all, but so is Elohim. Because “God” is used so often when we speak of the Creator, and because when you physically write it down the name “God” might be destroyed as refuse, it became a practice to write it as G-d. The custom is not to expose something holy to the possibility of being mistreated if possible. We live in an electronic world now, so the practice has just followed. But one can also consider that the information can be repeated or reprinted on a material that can equally be treated as mundane, so the reasoning stands.
Why do you think this is referring to repetition? To me it sounds more like we should mean every word when we pray. Not just say a lot of words to make the prayer "impressive".
You are correct that this is also talking about mindless prayers, but look at the text carefully. Jesus has been talking about not being like “the hypocrites” and then suddenly changes to not praying “like the Gentiles.” He is no longer talking about Jewish behavior, but Gentile behavior. What type of Gentile repetition is Jesus speaking of?
Two things to remember: Psalm 118 shows that Jews do repeat phrases in prayer. The Psalms are still our official prayers, and when you see us praying at the Western Wall we are often praying the Psalms. If Jesus was referring to mere repetition, this Psalm (and a few others) would be forbidden to use. Do you think Psalm 118 is bad? It uses repetition. Should we avoid and maybe even remove this Psalm because of this?
Second, I am not giving you my personal interpretation. What I mentioned is actual history about heathen worship. And this is recognized by scholars. Notice from the Catholic NABRE footnote on Matthew 6.7:
The example of what Christian prayer should be like contrasts it now not with the prayer of the hypocrites but with that of the pagans. Their babbling probably means their reciting a long list of divine names, hoping that one of them will force a response from the deity.
Protestants also agree, adding even further possibilities to the mix (it's not just one thing or the other). Wikipedia states the following under “Matthew 6:7”:
France notes that in this era Gentile prayer was portrayed as repeated incantations that had to be perfectly recited, but where the spirit and understanding of the prayer was secondary. Fowler states that the Jews believed the pagans needed to incessantly repeat their prayers, because their false gods would not answer them. The followers of the true God had no need to repeat their prayers as God would hear them the first time. Schweizer presents an alternate view. He does not feel battalogeo is a reference to repetition, but to nonsense. He argues that the Jews of that era felt that the pagans had forgotten the true name of God, and that their prayers were thus filled with long lists of meaningless words in an attempt to ensure the true name of God would at some point be mentioned.
Reading your post I could not help to wonder, do you think that the NT is accurate?
If not, how do you know what Jesus actually said or didn't say and what he actually meant?
I’m Jewish, I can only go by what the evidence and study of scholars reveals. I do believe Jesus was a real person, yes. I think the text reveals the beliefs of those who believed he was the Messiah and tried to make the circumstances fit their preconception.
If you do, how can you not think he was from God? He resurrected dead, rose from the grave himself etc.
Jesus may have been a prophet. But Elijah and Elisha also resurrected people, and one person rose from the grave after touching Elisha bones. None of this makes them the Messiah in Jewish theology anymore than Jesus.
Or do you think only some of it is true? In that case, how do you pick which parts to believe?
If you want a really close view on practically what I think about the New Testament, read The Jewish Annotated New Testament. The commentary there contains the closest to my views.
Or do you simply use the NT to point out problems with the JWs doctrines without believing a word of it yourself?
I don’t believe that it is fair to use the NT as a puppet. And I don’t agree that it is always right to just point out “problems with the JWs doctrines,” either. I can share what I know from scholarship to help people make decisions, but at the same time even though I was once a JW in my youth I don’t hate them or believe they are evil.
I do think they leave people with wrong views of Scripture and Judaism in particular (as well as wrong views about atheists, Catholics, Mormons, tuna fish, the paying of taxes, homosexuality and tight pants, etc.). And I feel I owe it to others to help them see things are not as black and white as the JWs lead people to believe. I think it an injustice not to try to help a little, even if my views may not be fully acceptable by some or may need adjustments themselves.
But the NT was written by Jews (except for Luke and Acts, and then the author was greatly influenced by Judaism), and there is a movement among Jews to study it, learn from it, and accept it as part of their own history. At one time the Christians viewed themselves as nothing more than another sect within Judaism, and at the time they wrote the NT they likely were nothing more. So there is a lot that we as Jews can learn from it ourselves. It is a story of how what some Jews believed about the Messiah.
The fact that this ushered in a 2000-year "Messianic Age " where Jews were persecuted, tortured, expelled from country after country, and then thrown into concentration camps by Christian nations in an attempt to wipe us off the face of the planet kinda makes it hard for me to accept the claims about Jesus in the New Testament...but that's just me.
