How can a Jew reject Jesus as the Messiah?

[Tumah]

JPS notes on Isaiah 59:20. 'Those in Jacob who turn back from sin: It is the penitent Israelites, not the whole nation, who will enjoy the salvation long predicted and thus far delayed.'

The penitent are Israelites, the whole nation is Jacob. So, the difference between the two is based on who 'turn back from sin'.

...you're joking....right?

Then I want to know from what sin the Israelite must repent.

Any of them.

If the trick is to be one of the remainder after the war, what do you think enables a person to remain and not be a casualty?

...turning...back...from...sin...

Did your school skip reading comprehension or something? What's with this post?!?

 

[ayin]

 

[ayin]

Is it all just a coincidence? Jesus is everywhere in the Tanakh.

 

[rosends]

@Harel13 teaching English is only one of the challenges. It seems that the system that used the meanings of the names of the letters, is now relying on the shape of the letter. Tav doesn't mean "cross". It means "sign" or "mark.

So T-V-R-H must mean "the sign of a hook on your head, behold" which, as we all know, is a reference to this lady. She's EVERYWHERE!

 

[Rival]

Is it all just a coincidence? Jesus is everywhere in the Tanakh.

Should've gone to Specsavers.

 

[ayin]

@Harel13 teaching English is only one of the challenges. It seems that the system that used the meanings of the names of the letters, is now relying on the shape of the letter. Tav doesn't mean "cross". It means "sign" or "mark.

So T-V-R-H must mean "the sign of a hook on your head, behold" which, as we all know, is a reference to this lady. She's EVERYWHERE!

Tav means sign, but the image of the letter is a cross. So the sign is the cross. Yes, "Hook" is also one of the meanings of the letter Vav next to "nail", but the image of the letter is a nail. The image of the letter Resh is a head, but it means "highest". It is interesting that the image of the third letter of the alphabet(Gimal) is a foot, which means "lowest" and the third last letter(Resh) has the image of a head, which means "highest".
So we have Tav(sign=cross), Vav(nail), Resh(head=highest) and Hey(behold). Now we need to combine these correctly, which would be,
"Behold the highest is nailed on the cross."

 

[rosends]

Tav means sign, but the image of the letter is a cross. So the sign is the cross. Yes, "Hook" is also one of the meanings of the letter Vav next to "nail", but the image of the letter is a nail. The image of the letter Resh is a head, but it means "highest". It is interesting that the image of the third letter of the alphabet(Gimal) is a foot, which means "lowest" and the third last letter(Resh) has the image of a head, which means "highest".
So we have Tav(sign=cross), Vav(nail), Resh(head=highest) and Hey(behold). Now we need to combine these correctly, which would be,
"Behold the highest is nailed on the cross."

So you are comfortable picking and choosing and mixing and matching meanings and images. For tav, the image matters to you. For Vav, you choose one meaning even though the image is of something else (and then you present the picture and interpret it the way you want... http://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/14651-vav disagrees with you). The reish means one thing, but you decide is means something else (and connect it to a letter that refers to a camel, not a foot). You are all over the place, trying to make what you need to find. Sad.

 

[Skywalker]

@Harel13 teaching English is only one of the challenges. It seems that the system that used the meanings of the names of the letters, is now relying on the shape of the letter. Tav doesn't mean "cross". It means "sign" or "mark.

So T-V-R-H must mean "the sign of a hook on your head, behold" which, as we all know, is a reference to this lady. She's EVERYWHERE!

The Bible says that Jesus died on a cross, not on a stake. The historian Irenaeus supports this. https://carm.org/jehovahs-witnesses/did-jesus-die-on-a-stake-or-a-cross/

Did Jesus die on a stake or a cross?
by Matt Slick | Dec 11, 2008 | Jehovah's Witnesses, World Religions

Historically and biblically, it is plain that Jesus died on a cross. The Jehovah’s Witnesses, however, teach that Jesus died on a stake, not a cross. It really does not matter the shape of the piece of wood on which Jesus died. The issue is whether or not He shed His blood for our sins. The publications of the Jehovah’s Witnesses, however, raise this as a significant issue which they use to accuse historic, biblical Christianity of pagan influence, so it is worth pausing to consider the facts:

The Greek word, which in many Bibles which is translated into “cross,” is the Greek word “stauros” which means, “an upright stake, esp. a pointed one, a cross.”John 20:25 says,

“The other disciples therefore said unto him, ‘We have seen the Lord. But he said to them, except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe.'”

Notice the use of the word nails (plural) in reference to his hands (plural). It makes far more sense to say that Jesus was crucified on a cross with outstretched hands and one nail in each hand placed above each other on a stake. That is why it says ” …in his hands the print of the nails…”

Therefore, it is most logical to state that Jesus died on a cross with outstretched arms. This also corresponds with relevant archeological evidence. The remains of a crucified Jewish man named Yehohanon, who was executed in the late 20’s A.D. (not long before Jesus) under the administration of Pontius Pilate was unearthed in a Judean tomb. Forensic analysis of the remains indicates that he was crucified with his arms stretched apart. A nail was found still embedded in his heel bone. All these details accord with the description of the similar execution of Jesus under Pilate, and point toward a cross shape rather than a single, upright beam or stake.3

The testimony of the early Christians also points unanimously to a cross shape. A popular Christian document of the early 100s A.D. compares the cross to the Greek letter “tau” which looks very much like our “t,” and also speaks of the cross prefigured in Moses stretching out his arms over the battlefield of the armies of Israel.4 Justin Martyr (114-165 AD), who was from Samaria which is between Galilee and Judea where most of Jesus’ ministry took place, wrote that the Passover lamb prefigured not only Jesus but also the cross, because:

“The lamb, which is roasted, is roasted and dressed up in the form of the cross. For one spit is transfixed right through from the lower parts up to the head, and one across the back, to which are attached the legs of the lamb”5

Irenaeus also describes the cross’s shape as having points both up and down and to each side, as well as mentioning a post on which the nailed person rests.6 The “Palatine Graphito” (a late second-century piece of Roman graffiti mocking a Christian for worshiping the crucified Jesus) also pictures Jesus’ execution as being on a cross.7 Even some of the earliest New Testament manuscripts we have found (P45, P66, and P75) abbreviate the Greek word “Stauros” by omitting the “au” in the middle and putting the Greek letters for “t” and “r” on top of one another, causing them to form a “t” shape with a circle over it, or a graphic of a figure crucified on a cross.8 All of this together constitutes rather broad testimony that the earliest Christians believed that Jesus died with His arms stretched out on a cross. They not only represent early testimony but also lived in the world that Jesus lived in and would know better if crucifixions were not carried out in that manner.

On one final note, the Jehovah’s Witnesses will often point out that the cross is a pagan symbol in some ancient cultures, but that is meaningless. A cross is simply two intersecting lines. While it is a symbol used in some pagan cultures, it is also a normal letter used in many alphabets and often occurs in windows, architecture, and the design of street intersections. Anywhere straight lines or beams intersect it creates a cross. The cross was one of the Roman Empire’s methods of execution simply because putting two beams together to nail someone too forms a cross shape, just like so many other things do. Even if, however, the cross was, in fact, always a pagan symbol, Rome was a pagan culture! Why would it be strange for them to use a pagan symbol in their executions or anywhere else in their life? So the argument that some ancient pagan cultures used cross-shaped symbols has nothing to do with the question of what shape the piece of wood was that the Roman soldiers under Pontius Pilate used to execute Jesus.

Even here, on such a largely insignificant detail of history, the Jehovah’s Witness’s literature is entirely untrustworthy and unable to handle the most basic biblical and historical facts rightly.

 

[ayin]

So you are comfortable picking and choosing and mixing and matching meanings and images. For tav, the image matters to you. For Vav, you choose one meaning even though the image is of something else (and then you present the picture and interpret it the way you want... WAW - JewishEncyclopedia.com disagrees with you). The reish means one thing, but you decide is means something else (and connect it to a letter that refers to a camel, not a foot). You are all over the place, trying to make what you need to find. Sad.

 

[rosends]

The Bible says that Jesus died on a cross, not on a stake. The historian Irenaeus supports this. https://carm.org/jehovahs-witnesses/did-jesus-die-on-a-stake-or-a-cross/

Hey! That's great! But since I didn't say anything related to that, I'm left with, "so what?"

 

[PruePhillip]

It appears you are not comfortable reading Iyov (Job) from start to finish using only the Hebrew text. Maybe you feel that the Hebrew text and the context don't support your position. That is okay. If you change your mind about my Zoom offer let me know. cheers.

The context of Job was his suffering. In the midst of this he has a revelation of his
Redeemer the one who who is alive now but one day will appear on the earth.
Some of those who suffered had similar revelations of the Redeemer, including
David. Interestingly King Solomon wrote of no revelation - he was a wise man,
but his life of luxury might have precluded him from such insight.
Zechariah spoke of the Jewish kingly Messiah coming, and the Jews mourning
when they recognize this man as the lowly man they pierced.

This is the context.

 

[rosends]

That's nice. i can find other pictures which list other things.

This one has camel for gimel
This one understands the letters in the 4 letter name (which overlap Torah) differently

when you start with your conclusion, you can twist all sorts of ways to get there.

 

[ayin]

John 2:19-21 Jesus answered and said to them: Destroy this house, and in three days I will raise it up. Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this house built, and thou wilt set it up in three days? But he spoke of the house of his body.

John 10:17-18 Therefore the Father loves me, because I lay down my life that I may take it again. No one takes it from me, but I take it from myself. I have power to let it go, and I have power to take it back. I have received this commandment from my Father.
He died by his own hand, by his authority.

 

[rosends]

controlling the head of an ox (others say "clan") has teeth that mark your hand

this is an old fashioned way of saying "if you mess with the bull, you get the horns"

ancient wisdom from the Torah!

 

[Redemptionsong]

...you're joking....right?


Any of them.


...turning...back...from...sin...

Did your school skip reading comprehension or something? What's with this post?!?

Let me make it a bit clearer.

Isaiah 59:20. 'He shall come as redeemer to Zion,
To those in Jacob who turn back from sin
- declares the LORD.'

So, even to a simpleton like me, this passage is clear enough. There will be some in the nation, Jacob, who will turn back from sin, and others who will not.

Now, let's add another scripture. This time from Jeremiah 31:33,34.
'But such is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after these days - declares the LORD: I will put My Teaching into their inmost being and inscribe it upon their hearts. Then I will be their God, and they will be my people. No longer will they need to teach one another and say to one another, "Heed the LORD"; for all of them, from the least of them to the greatest, shall heed Me - declares the LORD.
For I will forgive their iniquities,
And remember their sins no more.'

Jeremiah tells us that all Israel will be saved.

Now, a little application of logic. If all Israel is saved, but all Jacob is not saved, can the two names refer to all the same people? My thinking says that the two are different.

Can we agree on this distinction?

 

[YoursTrue]

Those verses shows that the members of the Trinity had different roles.

There is nothing, absolutely nothing, to suggest in any way in the scriptures that there are three persons, each of the three persons God, equal to the others. Nothing. That you say they (all three) are equal really really makes no sense whatsoever. By or through can mean the same thing. Jesus did not change his personality as he was in subjection to his Father. He was always in subjection and always will be.

 

[Skywalker]

There is nothing, absolutely nothing, to suggest in any way in the scriptures that there are three persons, each of the three persons God, equal to the others. Nothing. That you say they (all three) are equal really really makes no sense whatsoever. By or through can mean the same thing. Jesus did not change his personality as he was in subjection to his Father. He was always in subjection and always will be.

Jesus being in subjection to the Father doesn't mean that their essence was different.

 

[dybmh]

"... the Blessed God shall come down teaching; His death shall bring ... "

God can die? That's an odd definition of a God.

I rate this: Not super convincing. But nice try

 

[greenvalley]

1. He was not a King over Israel (by which is meant a real king, not a 'spiritual king').
2. He did not gather the lost tribes / exiles back to Eretz Israel.
3. He did not bring peace to Israel / vanquish Israel's enemies.
4. He was not from the lineage of King David / his lineage is suspect.
5. He did not have children and a long life.
6. He did not usher in a Messianic Era wherein knowledge of the True G-d is spread across the earth and folks from all nations will come to worship at Jerusalem, realising the wrongness of their old religions.

the bible from genesis to revelation points toward jesus christ as the messiah. in genesis 3:15 Jehovah God says "i will put enmity between you and the woman and between your offspring and her offspring. He will crush your head, and you will strike him in the heel." the question: who was Jehovah God talking to? do you know the meaning of this verse?

 

[YoursTrue]

Matthew 25:13 in the KJV removes "wherin the Son of man cometh". Matthew 27:54 changes "the son of God" to "a son of God". A Christian is a son of God, they aren't the son of God.

They aren't God either.