How can a Jew reject Jesus as the Messiah?

[blü 2]

I'm not saying that the Tanakh was vague. Even if I am, can't that mean that there might be a second coming, since it isn't stated either way?

Problem is, Jesus is mentioned nowhere in the Tanakh, meaning there's no Jewish 'prophecy' about him. And as portrayed in the NT, Jesus has none of the qualifications of a Jewish messiah, being neither a civil, military or religious leader nor anointed in accordance with Jewish practice.

I'm not Jewish ─ in my childhood and early youth I was Pisco ─ but as something of a classicist I find the Christian custom of mangling the meaning of parts of the Tanakh in order to 'prophecy' Jesus most irritating ─ all ancient documents deserve the respect of having their words and meanings understood with as little distortion as possible.

Yes, the gospel authors did it out loud and proud all the time, but that's no excuse, The author of Matthew required Mary to be a virgin because the Septuagint in translating Isaiah 7:14 into Greek had rendered Hebrew 'almah, young woman, as parthenos, virgin ─ and if you actually read the context of Isaiah 7:14 you'll see it's set in a time roughly contemporary with its writing, and it's about someone else entirely. The author of Matthew likewise invented the unhistoric 'Taxation Census' story to get Jesus to be born in Bethlehem to 'fulfill' Micah 5:2. He invented the unhistoric 'Massacre of the Innocents' story to get Jesus into Egypt to 'fulfill' Hosea 11.1. He absurdly sat Jesus across a foal and a donkey to ride into Jerusalem "to fulfill prophecy" (Matthew 21:2-5) namely Zechariah 9.9.

And so on and so on and so on.

Sheesh.

 

[Skywalker]

Problem is, Jesus is mentioned nowhere in the Tanakh, meaning there's no Jewish 'prophecy' about him. And as portrayed in the NT, Jesus has none of the qualifications of a Jewish messiah, being neither a civil, military or religious leader nor anointed in accordance with Jewish practice.

I'm not Jewish ─ in my childhood and early youth I was Pisco ─ but as something of a classicist I find the Christian custom of mangling the meaning of parts of the Tanakh in order to 'prophecy' Jesus most irritating ─ all ancient documents deserve the respect of having their words and meanings understood with as little distortion as possible.

Yes, the gospel authors did it out loud and proud all the time, but that's no excuse, The author of Matthew required Mary to be a virgin because the Septuagint in translating Isaiah 7:14 into Greek had rendered Hebrew 'almah, young woman, as parthenos, virgin ─ and if you actually read the context of Isaiah 7:14 you'll see it's set in a time roughly contemporary with its writing, and it's about someone else entirely. The author of Matthew likewise invented the unhistoric 'Taxation Census' story to get Jesus to be born in Bethlehem to 'fulfill' Micah 5:2. He invented the unhistoric 'Massacre of the Innocents' story to get Jesus into Egypt to 'fulfill' Hosea 11.1. He absurdly sat Jesus across a foal and a donkey to ride into Jerusalem "to fulfill prophecy" (Matthew 21:2-5) namely Zechariah 9.9.

And so on and so on and so on.

Sheesh.

Jewish tradition of the Messiah delivering the Jews from the Romans is an interpretation not mentioned in the Tanakh, it's an opinion.

 

[blü 2]

Jewish tradition of the Messiah delivering the Jews from the Romans is an interpretation not mentioned in the Tanakh, it's an opinion.

You would surely agree Jewish traditions of the Messiah delivering the Jews from their enemies to become an independent nation again, are unambiguous, whether they spell out Romans or not, no?

And you'd surely agree Jesus did none of that either, no?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Over a thousand posts. This is what happens when you feed it.

 

[Skywalker]

You would surely agree Jewish traditions of the Messiah delivering the Jews from their enemies to become an independent nation again, are unambiguous, whether they spell out Romans or not, no?

And you'd surely agree Jesus did none of that either, no?

Jewish traditions are not Old Testament prophecies. Jesus did not deliver the Jews from their first century enemies, I agree, but Israel became an independent nation like the Bible predicting and Jesus will defeat the Antichrist, an enemy of Israel, in the future.

 

[YoursTrue]

God in His divine nature cannot die, but God in His human nature he could. YHWH became man, and as man he was crucified.
Zech 12:10 And I will pour out on the house of David and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem the spirit of grace and supplication; and they will look upon me whom they have pierced, and they will mourn over him like the mourning over the only son, and bitterly grieve over him as one bitterly grieves over the firstborn.

Sorry, but it doesn't mean that Jesus was God in the flesh on the earth. Or that he was part of a trinity with a different dual nature from the other two so-called godpersons.

 

[YoursTrue]

The angel of the Lord was the title the Son of God used in the Old Testament. Jesus is not Michael the archangel.

So then let's try to be honest. The son of God was an angel. Or he called himself an angel but you say he really wasn't an angel. He just gave himself that title.

 

[Skywalker]

Sorry, but it doesn't mean that Jesus was God in the flesh on the earth. Or that he was part of a trinity with a different dual nature from the other two so-called godpersons.

Why could the God who created the universe and died for our sins not be able to have a dual nature? There would be no reason for Jesus to remove his humanity when he ascended to heaven.

 

[Skywalker]

So then let's try to be honest. The son of God was an angel. Or he called himself an angel but you say he really wasn't an angel. He just gave himself that title.

Angel means messenger. Jesus appeared to the parents of Samson as the Angel of the Lord because nobody could see the face of God in his fullness.

 

[YoursTrue]

Yahweh is the name of the Godhead who created everything, and Jesus is the second person of the Trinity.

You are making that up.

 

[YoursTrue]

Why could the God who created the universe and died for our sins not be able to have a dual nature? There would be no reason for Jesus to remove his humanity when he ascended to heaven.

God does not die. Jesus was not God equal to God in the flesh on earth with a dual nature.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

Messianic Jews and Hebrew Christians often use the term Yeshua, but they don't believe that it's a name more sacred than the English Jesus.

The Sacred Namers and the Hebrew Roots think that name is more sacred? How did they come to such a conclusion?

 

[YoursTrue]

Angel means messenger. Jesus appeared to the parents of Samson as the Angel of the Lord because nobody could see the face of God in his fullness.

Again...you are saying that Jesus is an angel.

 

[YoursTrue]

Why could the God who created the universe and died for our sins not be able to have a dual nature? There would be no reason for Jesus to remove his humanity when he ascended to heaven.

Jesus experienced as a man what people experience. He was faithful into death. God does not die. Therefore his name was placed by GOD (not himself and not one, two, or three parts of a trinity) to be over every other name. Except of course the name of the One who sent him. 1 Corinthians 15.

 

[Skywalker]

You are making that up.

The expression the Trinity is not mentioned in the Bible but the Godhead is.
Colossians 2:9

For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form

 

[Skywalker]

God does not die. Jesus was not God equal to God in the flesh on earth with a dual nature.

How can there be no plurality within God if there is a Ruach Kodesh?

 

[YoursTrue]

How can there be no plurality within God if there is a Ruach Kodesh?

Just like Jesus was sent by God. God can move mountains.

 

[Skywalker]

The Sacred Namers and the Hebrew Roots think that name is more sacred? How did they come to such a conclusion?

I don't agree them about the name Yahshua. I think the Hebrew name of Jesus was Yehoshua, shortened to Yeshua.

 

[Skywalker]

Again...you are saying that Jesus is an angel.

The Angel of the Lord who talked to Moses at the burning bush, was God.

 

[Skywalker]

Jesus experienced as a man what people experience. He was faithful into death. God does not die. Therefore his name was placed by GOD (not himself and not one, two, or three parts of a trinity) to be over every other name. Except of course the name of the One who sent him. 1 Corinthians 15.

Jesus couldn't have died for the sins of the world if he was a finite person. God would not place Jesus over every other name because God doesn't share his glory with anyone.