Not all sacrifices are for the purposes of sin atonement.
Passover is one good example of a sacrifice that was not made for the purpose of sin atonement.
So it is improper for you to insist that Jesus was both a sin atonement and the passover sacrifice.
I mean, it's improper for you to...
That's an odd thing to say... lambs don't have leaven anyhow. So it's meaningless to lean into a "Jesus is the lamb" metaphor and say that he is "without leaven".
And while we're at it... animals can't sin. Being spotless is very much a literal, physical distinction. I watched the Mel...
From a Jewish point of view, these are most bizarre things to say.
Exodus 12:14 And this day shall be for you as a memorial, and you shall celebrate it as a festival for the Lord; throughout your generations, you shall celebrate it as an everlasting statute.
It doesn't point forward. It...
For similar reasons, I do not regard "the new testament" as scripture.
It really is that simple. You continuing to attempt to get me to see Jesus in the Tanakh would be like me trying to convince you that the Quran is God's word and that Mohammed is God's final prophet.
You didn't answer my question.
And technically, the Quran does consider Jesus to be the Messiah.
But please give me a simple answer: Do you believe that the Quran is the word of God as dictated to Muhammad by the archangel Gabriel?
Let me ask you 2 questions. Yes or no answers.
Do you believe that the Quran is the word of God as dictated to Muhammad by the archangel Gabriel?
Is it the next step in God's progressive revelation?
If you're going to just repeat yourself, then so will I.
Keep in mind that as a Jew, the text you call the "new testament" is not considered scripture.
As nice as that sounds, it also gives you the freedom to start making things up and claiming "that's what the text meant all along".
Search the scripture. See what they say. They don't say anything about Jesus.
Keep in mind that as a Jew, the text you call the "new testament" is not...
If feel like if you really believed that, you'd be a Muslim. Or a Mormon. Or a combination thereof.
"progressive revelation" is Christianity's way of cleaning up the mess that is described by the fact that you make claims about the Tanakh saying certain things, and then when it's pointed out...
A meaningless statement.
The biggest indication that the Messiah won't come twice.
Nope.
Nope. Having a better handle on what is and isn't a messianic prophecy clears up most of those apparent contradictions right away.
So what we've established is that two of the three passages from the Tanakh you've mentioned are related to the messianic kingdom.
None of this has anything to do with Jesus.