How can a Jew reject Jesus as the Messiah?

[YoursTrue]

The New Testament keeps it simple. The name of Jesus is Yeshua not Yahshua.

How would you say Joshua from the Greek Scriptures, any idea?

 

[YoursTrue]

Yahweh was Jesus, since Jesus is the only part of the plurality of the Trinity who became a man.

That really doesn't make any sense. But then if you believe it, that's what matters to you I suppose. And it can matter to others if in fact they realize the truth of the matter when presented so they can accept what is said or not.
But let's go back to the name Jesus in what is often called the "New Testament," shall we? How was it transcribed into Greek, any idea? "Ehav4Ever" gave you a real good idea about that recently, do you remember that?

 

[YoursTrue]

Since Jehovah is a jealous God, it doesn't make sense that he would create a junior deity.

You mean a lesser god? Hmm let us say that Jehovah is the Most High God. "Most High God" indicates there are other gods. Who or what they are is sometimes a scholarly endeavor to see and learn. The fact that elohim is plural does not mean that Jehovah elohim is a trinity. Or that He is a compendium of gods or multiple. But it's not up to me to explain it right now, hope you eventually can learn what it means.
Hope you're doing well during these troubled times.

 

[rosends]

How would you say Joshua from the Greek Scriptures, any idea?

Is it ᾿Ιησοῖ ?

i found this explanation - i can't vouch for it

If His name was Yeshua/Yehoshua, why do we call Him Jesus?

 

[blü 2]

The Kingdom of God is not imposed. God knew that his Son would be killed and rejected, but it was still necessary to make known the Anointed One, and for the faithful few to take the message to the wider world.

The nation is, I believe, given one last chance.

So we're waiting for a moment when the entire world votes to set up the Kingdom and worship the God of Judaism? And Jesus thought that would happen in his lifetime?

Really? What IQ do you attribute to Jesus?

And now it would be a moment like nothing we've seen in the past 2000 years and are exquisitely unlikely to see in the next 2000 years?

Really?

 

[Skywalker]

How would you say Joshua from the Greek Scriptures, any idea?

Yehoshua. Yeshua - Wikipedia

The name Yeshua is a shortened version of the name Yehoshua or Joshua and is the literal Hebrew word for Salvation.

 

[rosends]

The literal Hebrew word for "saving" is "y'shua" with the stress on the second syllable. The nickname for Yehoshua was Yeyshu'a with the stress on the first syllable.

 

[Skywalker]

You mean a lesser god? Hmm let us say that Jehovah is the Most High God. "Most High God" indicates there are other gods. Who or what they are is sometimes a scholarly endeavor to see and learn. The fact that elohim is plural does not mean that Jehovah elohim is a trinity. Or that He is a compendium of gods or multiple. But it's not up to me to explain it right now, hope you eventually can learn what it means.
Hope you're doing well during these troubled times.

The term the Most High God is similar to saying something isn't too bad when you aren't implying it's bad at all, but you don't want to give it importance. Saying something is not bad would give it importance. Saying it isn't too bad gives a similar message without the importance given by the other expression. Saying something isn't too bad isn't to insinuate that it's a little bad.

Do you think elohim is a reference to there being other gods?

 

[Skywalker]

That really doesn't make any sense. But then if you believe it, that's what matters to you I suppose. And it can matter to others if in fact they realize the truth of the matter when presented so they can accept what is said or not.
But let's go back to the name Jesus in what is often called the "New Testament," shall we? How was it transcribed into Greek, any idea? "Ehav4Ever" gave you a real good idea about that recently, do you remember that?

The name Jesus was translated Ieosus into the Greek by finding the similar sounds that existed in Greek to Yehoshua or Yeshua.

 

[Skywalker]

No. He wasn't.

There is no Trinity mentioned anywhere in the NT. The Trinity doctrine wasn't invented till the 4th century.

Please stop making things up. (There's a rude expression for that which is perhaps more appropriate in the circumstances, but I'll refrain from using it.) And read and understand what the text actually says. In the real world it does NOT say whatever you want it to say.
So, you say, he was instead a relentless deceiver and liar throughout his mission on earth. An interesting view.

What else do you say he deceived everyone about?

And on the cross he said "Me, me, why have I forsaken me", right?

Jesus said, "My God, my God" not "Me, me" because he wasn't talking to himself, he was talking to God the Father. God the Father and God the Son have a relationship within the plurality of the Trinity. Colossians 2;9 mentions the Godhead, which means the same thing as the Trinity That verse also talks about the divinity of Jesus.

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

That doesn't mean that Jesus was also the incarnation of God the Father and the Holy Spirit. The church doctrine of the Trinity didn't exist before the 4th century, but the Bible's doctrine of the Godhead existed since Genesis 1:26-28. Bible Gateway passage: Genesis 1:26-28 - King James Version

And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

And God blessed them, and God said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it: and have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth.

 

[blü 2]

Jesus said, "My God, my God" not "Me, me" because he wasn't talking to himself, he was talking to God the Father.

More nonsense. He was talking to God period ─ his God, the one God of the Jews.

God the Father and God the Son have a relationship within the plurality of the Trinity. Colossians 2;9 mentions the Godhead, which means the same thing as the Trinity

No, it means the one God of the Jews, the God of Jesus (as Jesus clearly states in those quotes I gave you). As I said, the Trinity concept didn't exist when the NT was written, or for two centuries or more afterwards.

That verse also talks about the divinity of Jesus.

If it's a verse from Paul or John then it's referring to Jesus' pre-existence with God in heaven. As I said, the God of Jesus was the non-Trinitarian god of the Jews, Jesus being a circumcised Jew, and therefore of God's covenant with the Jews


And you forgot to tell me what other lies and deceits Jesus practiced on his followers.

It would be fair to say that if Jesus was as utterly lacking in frankness, so total in his deceit, as you say, then there's really no basis for trusting anything else he said, is there? Let others protest he tells the truth, you say he's lied about the biggest thing of all, so the foundation has well and truly failed and the whole structure of credibility irremediably destroyed.

 

[Skywalker]

More nonsense. He was talking to God period ─ his God, the one God of the Jews.
No, it means the one God of the Jews, the God of Jesus (as Jesus clearly states in those quotes I gave you). As I said, the Trinity concept didn't exist when the NT was written, or for two centuries or more afterwards.
If it's a verse from Paul or John then it's referring to Jesus' pre-existence with God in heaven. As I said, the God of Jesus was the non-Trinitarian god of the Jews, Jesus being a circumcised Jew, and therefore of God's covenant with the Jews


And you forgot to tell me what other lies and deceits Jesus practiced on his followers.

It would be fair to say that if Jesus was as utterly lacking in frankness, so total in his deceit, as you say, then there's really no basis for trusting anything else he said, is there? Let others protest he tells the truth, you say he's lied about the biggest thing of all, so the foundation has well and truly failed and the whole structure of credibility destroyed.

[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

He was talking to God the Father in his humanity. IN heaven Jesus never would have said that in heaven. https://carm.org/about-jesus/if-jes...e-say-my-god-my-god-why-have-you-forsaken-me/

Why did Jesus say, “My God my God why have you forsaken me”?

The reason Jesus would say this (Matt. 27:46) is that He was a man as well as divine, and as a man, He was made under The Law (Galatians 4:4) and for a while lower than the angels (Hebrews 2:9). People sometimes don’t realize that Jesus, being a man under the law, would have someone He would call God, someone He would worship, etc., because He is under The Law. The law required worshiping God and praying to Him.

Again, Jesus has two distinct natures, the divine, and human. We call this the hypostatic union, and it is exemplified in verses like the following.

• John 1:1, 14, “In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God and the Word was God… 14, and the Word became flesh and dwelt among us…”
• Colossians 2:9, “for in Him dwells all the fullness of deity in bodily form.”
• Hebrews 1:8, “but of the son, he says, ‘Your throne, O God, is forever and ever.'”

 

[blü 2]

He was talking to God the Father in his humanity. IN heaven Jesus never would have said that in heaven.

Maybe he was talking to God the Father as God of the Jews. but that God, Jesus' God, is categorically NOT triune, either in the bible or in Jewish belief.

The Trinity doctrine didn't exist before the 4th century CE. Not only that but it exists as "a mystery in the strict sense" in that "it cannot be known by unaided human reason apart from revelation, nor cogently demonstrated by reason after it has been revealed" ─ the churches' words, not mine. When you understand what "a mystery in the strict sense" is, you'll understand that it means "incoherent", "a nonsense".

And if there was an historical Jesus and if somehow the idea had been put to him two or three centuries before it was dreamed up, I suspect he'd have been smart enough to reply, "How many times I gotta tell ya, I'm NOT God, and anyway that Trinity thing is a heap of garbage, makes no sense."

 

[Eyes to See]

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.

1. The Messiah had to die first. Jesus was put to death.
2. All the tribes were reunited after the repatriation after the exile in 537 B. C. E. when they returned to rebuild Jerusalem.
3. Prophecy said that Jerusalem and the temple would be destroyed after the Messiah was put to death.
4. He was from the line of David. There is no disputing that fact. Not even his enemies denied that. The genealogical records were destroyed in 70 C. E. No human coming after that date could prove their genealogical decent to David as did Jesus. You will NEVER see anyone EVER after 70 C. E. that could rightly claim to come from David with the record to back it up.
5. Jesus is the Eternal Father and the Prince of Peace.
6. The 1,000 year reign of Jesus over, not just one part of earth, but all the earth starts after Armageddon.

 

[Rival]

1. The Messiah had to die first. Jesus was put to death.

This is not a function of the Moshiach.

2. All the tribes were reunited after the repatriation after the exile in 537 B. C. E. when they returned to rebuild Jerusalem.

No they weren't.

3. Prophecy said that Jerusalem and the temple would be destroyed after the Messiah was put to death.

No it doesn't. It says the opposite. The Moshiach will usher in the Messianic era wherein Yerushalayim will dwell in safety and the Temple will stand.

Zach 14:9-11
And the Lord shall become King over all the earth; on that day shall the Lord be one, and His name one.
The whole earth shall be changed to be like a plain, from the hill of Rimmon in the south of Jerusalem; but it [Jerusalem] will be elevated high and remain in its old place; from the gate of Benjamin to the place of the first gate, until the corner gate, and from the tower of Hananel until the king's wine-cellars.
And they shall dwell therein, and there shall be no more destruction; but Jerusalem shall dwell in safety.

Micah 4:1-2
And it shall be at the end of the days, that the mountain of the Lord's house shall be firmly established at the top of the mountains, and it shall be raised above the hills, and peoples shall stream upon it. And many nations shall go, and they shall say, "Come, let us go up to the Lord's mount and to the house of the God of Jacob, and let Him teach us of His ways, and we will go in His paths," for out of Zion shall the Torah come forth, and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.

4. He was from the line of David. There is no disputing that fact. Not even his enemies denied that. The genealogical records were destroyed in 70 C. E. No human coming after that date could prove their genealogical decent to David as did Jesus. You will NEVER see anyone EVER after 70 C. E. that could rightly claim to come from David with the record to back it up.

Jesus has two different genealogies. He's also claimed to be born of a virgin. If he has no father, he's no relation of David's, and secondly, if he has two lineages this makes them both suspect, especially as the earliest gospel hasn't one at all.

5. Jesus is the Eternal Father and the Prince of Peace.

This is your belief.

6. The 1,000 year reign of Jesus over, not just one part of earth, but all the earth starts after Armageddon.

How very convenient; and again, your belief supported by no Tanakh verses.

 

[Eyes to See]

No it doesn't. It says the opposite.

Prophecy is very clear about the fact that the Messiah was going to be cut off. And that as a direct result what had been decided upon in heaven would be the destruction of Jerusalem and it's temple:

“There are 70 weeks that have been determined for your people and your holy city, in order to terminate the transgression, to finish off sin, to make atonement for error, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up the vision and the prophecy, and to anoint the Holy of Holies. 25 You should know and understand that from the issuing of the word to restore and to rebuild Jerusalem until Mes·siʹah the Leader, there will be 7 weeks, also 62 weeks. She will be restored and rebuilt, with a public square and moat, but in times of distress.
26 “And after the 62 weeks, Mes·siʹah will be cut off, with nothing for himself.
“And the people of a leader who is coming will destroy the city and the holy place. And its end will be by the flood. And until the end there will be war; what is decided upon is desolations.
27 “And he will keep the covenant in force for the many for one week; and at the half of the week, he will cause sacrifice and gift offering to cease.
“And on the wing of disgusting things there will be the one causing desolation; and until an extermination, what was decided on will be poured out also on the one lying desolate.”
-Daniel 9:24-27.

This prophecy tells us exactly when the Messiah would appear on earth. 69 weeks of years from the call to rebuild Jerusalem, which happened in 455 B. C. E. If you count 69 weeks of years (483 years) from 455. B. C. E. you come to the year 29 C. E. when Jesus was baptized with holy spirit.

Notice that verse 26 says the Messiah would be cut off, that is put to death. And then it says that the people of a leader (the Roman armies) would come and destroy the city (Jerusalem) and the holy place (the temple). This was as a direct consequence of the Jews rejection of God's Messiah and putting him to death just as the prophecy foretold they would do.

If you want to look closer at the prophecy the Messiah was to be put to death at the half of the week at the last week of years, which would be 3 1/2 years after 29 C. E. And Jesus was put to death on Nisan 14, 33 C. E.

 

[Rival]

Prophecy is very clear about the fact that the Messiah was going to be cut off. And that as a direct result what had been decided upon in heaven would be the destruction of Jerusalem and it's temple:

“There are 70 weeks that have been determined for your people and your holy city, in order to terminate the transgression, to finish off sin, to make atonement for error, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up the vision and the prophecy, and to anoint the Holy of Holies. 25 You should know and understand that from the issuing of the word to restore and to rebuild Jerusalem until Mes·siʹah the Leader, there will be 7 weeks, also 62 weeks. She will be restored and rebuilt, with a public square and moat, but in times of distress.
26 “And after the 62 weeks, Mes·siʹah will be cut off, with nothing for himself.
“And the people of a leader who is coming will destroy the city and the holy place. And its end will be by the flood. And until the end there will be war; what is decided upon is desolations.
27 “And he will keep the covenant in force for the many for one week; and at the half of the week, he will cause sacrifice and gift offering to cease.
“And on the wing of disgusting things there will be the one causing desolation; and until an extermination, what was decided on will be poured out also on the one lying desolate.”
-Daniel 9:24-27.

This prophecy tells us exactly when the Messiah would appear on earth. 69 weeks of years from the call to rebuild Jerusalem, which happened in 455 B. C. E. If you count 69 weeks of years (483 years) from 455. B. C. E. you come to the year 29 C. E. when Jesus was baptized with holy spirit.

Notice that verse 26 says the Messiah would be cut off, that is put to death. And then it says that the leader (the Roman armies) would come and destroy the city (Jerusalem) and the holy place (the temple). This was as a direct consequence of the Jews rejection of God's Messiah and putting him to death just as the prophecy foretold they would do.

If you want to look closer at the prophecy the Messiah was to be put to death at the half of the week at the last week of years, which would be 3 1/2 years after 29 C. E. And Jesus was put to death on Nisan 14, 33 C. E.

This passage isn't even about the Moshiach. Your translation, whichever biased one it is, also puts a capital M on the word 'messiah' - very odd, how do you decide that? There are several people this passage can be speaking about but the main one is Koresh (Cyrus of Persia) as the anointed one who allows the Jews to return to Israel.

The other anointed one is being 'cut off' - not a good thing, ever. Read what it says:

And after the sixty-two weeks, the anointed one will be cut off, and he will be no more, and the people of the coming monarch will destroy the city and the Sanctuary, and his end will come about by inundation, and until the end of the war, it will be cut off into desolation.

This is not a good thing to happen to anyone. It says 'he will be no more' - not, 'but don't worry he'll be back'!

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Prophecy is very clear about the fact that the Messiah was going to be cut off. And that as a direct result what had been decided upon in heaven would be the destruction of Jerusalem and it's temple:

“There are 70 weeks that have been determined for your people and your holy city, in order to terminate the transgression, to finish off sin, to make atonement for error, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal up the vision and the prophecy, and to anoint the Holy of Holies. 25 You should know and understand that from the issuing of the word to restore and to rebuild Jerusalem until Mes·siʹah the Leader, there will be 7 weeks, also 62 weeks. She will be restored and rebuilt, with a public square and moat, but in times of distress.
26 “And after the 62 weeks, Mes·siʹah will be cut off, with nothing for himself.
“And the people of a leader who is coming will destroy the city and the holy place. And its end will be by the flood. And until the end there will be war; what is decided upon is desolations.
27 “And he will keep the covenant in force for the many for one week; and at the half of the week, he will cause sacrifice and gift offering to cease.
“And on the wing of disgusting things there will be the one causing desolation; and until an extermination, what was decided on will be poured out also on the one lying desolate.”
-Daniel 9:24-27.

This prophecy tells us exactly when the Messiah would appear on earth. 69 weeks of years from the call to rebuild Jerusalem, which happened in 455 B. C. E. If you count 69 weeks of years (483 years) from 455. B. C. E. you come to the year 29 C. E. when Jesus was baptized with holy spirit.

Notice that verse 26 says the Messiah would be cut off, that is put to death. And then it says that the people of a leader (the Roman armies) would come and destroy the city (Jerusalem) and the holy place (the temple). This was as a direct consequence of the Jews rejection of God's Messiah and putting him to death just as the prophecy foretold they would do.

If you want to look closer at the prophecy the Messiah was to be put to death at the half of the week at the last week of years, which would be 3 1/2 years after 29 C. E. And Jesus was put to death on Nisan 14, 33 C. E.

I see the start date to use was BC457, but yes the 69 and 60 week prophecy do predict the Message of Jesus.

The same start date is used for the return of the Messiah, using the 2300 year prophecy gives 1844, this is how William Miller worked out the timing.

Regards Tony

 

[Skywalker]

This passage isn't even about the Moshiach. Your translation, whichever biased one it is, also puts a capital M on the word 'messiah' - very odd, how do you decide that? There are several people this passage can be speaking about but the main one is Koresh (Cyrus of Persia) as the anointed one who allows the Jews to return to Israel.

The other anointed one is being 'cut off' - not a good thing, ever. Read what it says:

And after the sixty-two weeks, the anointed one will be cut off, and he will be no more, and the people of the coming monarch will destroy the city and the Sanctuary, and his end will come about by inundation, and until the end of the war, it will be cut off into desolation.

This is not a good thing to happen to anyone. It says 'he will be no more' - not, 'but don't worry he'll be back'!

It means that the Messiah will die. The Messiah will be no more is not a reference regarding whether he will return or not. Jesus can return because since he is God, he is all powerful and can be resurrected. Do you disagree with the doctrine of the resurrection because of the verse that talks about the resurrection and the spirit of God? Bible Gateway passage: Romans 8:11 - New Living Translation

 

[Skywalker]

I see the start date to use was BC457, but yes the 69 and 60 week prophecy do predict the Message of Jesus.

The same start date is used for the return of the Messiah, using the 2300 year prophecy gives 1844, this is how William Miller worked out the timing.

Regards Tony

Jesus will reign for a thousand years after Armageddon. Did Bahuallah defeat the enemies of Israel at Meggido?