How can a Jew reject Jesus as the Messiah?

[Harel13]

The website I'm looking at about Jewish idea of what would constitute the Messiah says
"He must be a direct male descendant of King David and King Solomon, his son "
Question -- how would you know?
(From JewsforJudaism.org)

Personally, I've thought for a few years now that the realization that this person is the Messiah will be retroactive - only after he completes all or most of his duties, will we turn around and realize what had happened. As such, I expect the same would be with lineage. Sometime in the future, we'll be able to know our lineages and also that of this person who's the Messiah.

 

[YoursTrue]

Personally, I've thought for a few years now that the realization that this person is the Messiah will be retroactive - only after he completes all or most of his duties, will we turn around and realize what had happened. As such, I expect the same would be with lineage. Sometime in the future, we'll be able to know our lineages and also that of this person who's the Messiah.

I had a feeling you might go with the possibility of the dna route. But let me try to follow you a bit. Sometime in the future isn't going to be just around the corner.

 

[Harel13]

I had a feeling you might go with the possibility of the dna route. But let me try to follow you a bit. Sometime in the future isn't going to be just around the corner.

DNA? Who said DNA?

 

[YoursTrue]

DNA? Who said DNA?

Ok, don't get excited. How do you think you're going to figure lineage?

 

[Harel13]

Ok, don't get excited.

I'm not. Just a little surprised.

How do you think you're going to figure lineage?

We have a tradition that when Eliyahu the prophet will come, he'll answer the unsolvable questions. Same for lineage, tribal affiliation, etc. DNA is a problematic issue in halacha because it's never at 100% certainty.

 

[Batya]

I'm not. Just a little surprised.

We have a tradition that when Eliyahu the prophet will come, he'll answer the unsolvable questions. Same for lineage, tribal affiliation, etc. DNA is a problematic issue in halacha because it's never at 100% certainty.

I know there is a lot of emphasis on the male lineage of the Messiah, but I an curious to know what is the significance of Genesis 3:15 prophecying of the seed of the woman. Obviously everyone is born of a woman, so do you think it is possible that this is in some way inferring there will be more emphasis on the woman's side? I'm sure that's not endorsed in Judaism, but do you think there is any room for that biblically?

 

[Harel13]

I know there is a lot of emphasis on the male lineage of the Messiah, but I an curious to know what is the significance of Genesis 3:15 prophecying of the seed of the woman. Obviously everyone is born of a woman, so do you think it is possible that this is in some way inferring there will be more emphasis on the woman's side? I'm sure that's not endorsed in Judaism, but do you think there is any room for that biblically?

First, I don't think it's a prophecy. I think it's a statement of fact: You sinned, hence from now on you and your descendants will suffer. There's no big mystery hidden here. It's similar to a judge telling a criminal he's going to sit in prison for twenty years. That's not a prophecy, it's a statement of fact. From what I know, it's classically a Christian view to interpret this verse as a prophecy. Second, in Judaism, tribal and familial lineage comes from the male side, as you rightly stated, but national lineage comes from the female side (though this is true only for Jews, but let's not get into that). I don't think there's much to infer past that.

 

[Batya]

Very well then. I hope you don't mind my questions, but do you think that Jews would be less opposed to Yeshua if he was not promoted as the terribly Helenized, torah breaking Jesus that he is largely known as today?

 

[Harel13]

Very well then. I hope you don't mind my questions, but do you think that Jews would be less opposed to Yeshua if he was not promoted as the terribly Helenized, torah breaking Jesus that he is largely known as today?

Nah. Once a false Messiah, always a false Messiah. Especially if his legacy brought suffering for Jews. I recommend reading about other false messiahs.

 

[Batya]

Nah. Once a false Messiah, always a false Messiah. Especially if his legacy brought suffering for Jews. I recommend reading about other false messiahs.

His legacy first brought about suffering for his own followers at the hands of both Jews and Romans, it was later that perverted Christianity started persecuting Jews.

 

[Harel13]

His legacy first brought about suffering for his own followers at the hands of both Jews and Romans, it was later that perverted Christianity started persecuting Jews.

Okay. So we agree he has a bad legacy? In my opinion, he should have stuck to woodcraft, but of course, I say this in retrospect.

 

[Batya]

Okay. So we agree he has a bad legacy? In my opinion, he should have stuck to woodcraft, but of course, I say this in retrospect.

Not at all in my opinion. Jews have endured much suffering throughout time, even before Yeshua came around, but that doesn't mean there was anything bad about their legacy, God, the torah, or anything that gave them their identity.

 

[Harel13]

Not at all in my opinion. Jews have endured much suffering throughout time, even before Yeshua came around, but that doesn't mean there was anything bad about their legacy, God, the torah, or anything that gave them their identity.

Maybe, maybe not. But that's not the subject here.

 

[Rival]

it was later that perverted Christianity started persecuting Jews.

I would have to disagree with this. The Gospels, especially Matthew and John, make the Jewish people out to be the villains unless they're on Jesus' side. The Gospel of Matthew is responsible for generations of Christians blaming the Jews for Jesus' death and persecuting them for it for centuries. The Gospels were written in the first century, so from the evidence it seems that anti-Jewish feeling was grounded in Christianity pretty much from the start. The Gospels calling the Jewish folks a brood of vipers is hardly sending out chill vibes. The Christian persecution of Jews didn't come out of nowhere, imo, it's rooted in their scriptures.

 

[Batya]

I would have to disagree with this. The Gospels, especially Matthew and John, make the Jewish people out to be the villains unless they're on Jesus' side. The Gospel of Matthew is responsible for generations of Christians blaming the Jews for Jesus' death and persecuting them for it for centuries. The Gospels were written in the first century, so from the evidence it seems that anti-Jewish feeling was rooted in Christianity pretty much from the start. The Gospels calling the Jewish folks a brood of vipers is hardly sending out chill vibes. The Christian persecution of Jews didn't come out of nowhere, imo, it's rooted in their scriptures.

Well the whole issue of Matthew bring used to justify persecution of Jews is simply wrong, it was not written with that intent, and to interpret it that way is out of context with the rest of the NT. Many of Yeshua's disputes were with the religious leaders, pointing out their hypocrisy of rightly teaching Moshe, yet doing otherwise. Jews are not villains, the NT is not anti-Jew, and I think an honest reading of it would bear that out.

 

[Rival]

Well the whole issue of Matthew bring used to justify persecution of Jews is simply wrong, it was not written with that intent, and to interpret it that way is out of context with the rest of the NT. Many of Yeshua's disputes were with the religious leaders, pointing out their hypocrisy of rightly teaching Moshe, yet doing otherwise. Jews are not villains, the NT is not anti-Jew, and I think an honest reading of it would bear that out.

Jesus says this to some Pharisees in G-John-

“I know that you are Abraham’s descendants, but you seek to kill me, because my word has no place in you. I speak what I have seen with my Father, and you do what you have seen with your father.”
They answered and said to Him, “Abraham is our father.”
Jesus said to them, “If you were Abraham’s children, you would do the works of Abraham.
But now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth which I heard from God. Abraham did not do this. You do the deeds of your father.”
Then they said to him, “We were not born of fornication; we have one Father—God.”
Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I proceeded forth and came from God; nor have I come of myself, but He sent me. Why do you not understand my speech? Because you are not able to listen to my word. You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it. But because I tell the truth, you do not believe me. Which of you convicts me of sin? And if I tell the truth, why do you not believe me? He who is of God hears God’s words; therefore you do not hear, because you are not of God.”

I mean, that reads like an anti-Semitic diatribe to me?

 

[Batya]

Jesus says this to some Pharisees in G-John-

“I know that you are Abraham’s descendants, but you seek to kill me, because my word has no place in you. I speak what I have seen with my Father, and you do what you have seen with your father.”
They answered and said to Him, “Abraham is our father.”
Jesus said to them, “If you were Abraham’s children, you would do the works of Abraham.
But now you seek to kill me, a man who has told you the truth which I heard from God. Abraham did not do this. You do the deeds of your father.”
Then they said to him, “We were not born of fornication; we have one Father—God.”
Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I proceeded forth and came from God; nor have I come of myself, but He sent me. Why do you not understand my speech? Because you are not able to listen to my word. You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it. But because I tell the truth, you do not believe me. Which of you convicts me of sin? And if I tell the truth, why do you not believe me? He who is of God hears God’s words; therefore you do not hear, because you are not of God.”

I mean, that reads like an anti-Semitic diatribe to me?

Do you think that just because one is a descendant of Abraham means they can't do the works of the devil? Being a descendant of Abraham doesn't automatically make you righteous, this is what Yeshua was pointing out to them, it had nothing to do with Jews as a whole.

 

[Batya]

Do you think that just because one is a descendant of Abraham means they can't do the works of the devil? Being a descendant of Abraham doesn't automatically make you righteous, this is what Yeshua was pointing out to them, it had nothing to do with Jews as a whole.

It has never strictly been about physical lineage, even in the tanach, for example Ruth, Rahab, it is about those who are Israel and who join Israel by making YHWH their God and walking in his Torah. Would you disagree with that?

 

[Rival]

Do you think that just because one is a descendant of Abraham means they can't do the works of the devil? Being a descendant of Abraham doesn't automatically make you righteous, this is what Yeshua was pointing out to them, it had nothing to do with Jews as a whole.

I'm not saying Jews can't be wicked, but this paragraph is a diatribe, not a call to reasoned dialogue.

It has never strictly been about physical lineage, even in the tanach, for example Ruth, Rahab, it is about those who are Israel and who join Israel by making YHWH their God and walking in his Torah. Would you disagree with that?

These people were converts.

 

[Batya]

I'm not saying Jews can't be wicked, but this paragraph is a diatribe, not a call to reasoned dialogue.
He is not speaking against them because of who they are, but because of their deeds. If it were anti-Semitic, it would have been directed at then because of who they were

These people were converts.

Yes, converted to conforming with YHWH's ways.