The first thing that I'm pleased to read in your post is that you accept the Tanakh as the word of God! This is an important starting point for meaningful conversation about the person of Jesus.
I apologize if I was unclear. The Tanakh was written by our fellow humans as they existed between two and three thousand years ago, without outside interference; nor do they ever claim otherwise. But the Tanakh is important as a cultural reference point and rule-book.
It's also important to acknowledge that, throughout the Tanakh, prophecies of the coming Messiah are found in 'type' (such as Abraham taking Isaac for sacrifice at Mount Moriah)
I read that as a test, not a prophecy.
The trouble with prophecies is that they're a form of magic, and the number of authenticated instances of magic remains obstinately at zero. As I think I said, they were however one of the instruments of politics available to the players in ancient times. They can also come in handy for dating things eg the Jesus of Mark foretells the sack of Jerusalem (Mark 13:2) , so we know Mark is written after 70 CE.
In King David, for example, we have 'David my servant' or reference to the Messiah [see Ezekiel 37:24]
David is adopted by God as [his] son (Psalm 2:7, Psalm 89:6). In Mark, Jesus becomes the son of God in exactly the same way.
You believe that followers of Jesus concocted the story of Jesus, by taking prophecies from the Tanakh and ascribing them to Jesus, without justification.
Yes, I think the evidence for that is very strong ─ and as I showed you regarding the author of Matthew, blatant and undeniable. The fact that the gospels can be accounted for in this way ─ and that all the supernatural stories are necessarily fictions ─ make it credible that there was no historical Jesus, though my own view is that this remains an open question.
I hold that this is an impossible position to sustain, because there are events in the life of Jesus, such as the birth and crucifixion, which cannot have been concocted by the design of Jesus' followers!
The only credible story of the birth of Jesus is the one in Mark, where he's just an ordinary Jew (until. we're told, the heavens open and God adopts him as [his] son). As I've also previously mentioned, the Jesus of Paul and the Jesus of John pre-existed in heaven with God and created the material universe, and the Jesuses of Matthew and Luke are the products of divine insemination. Five Jesuses, three origins, only one credible origin.
Yet, these events are prophesied in scripture.
, No, parts of scripture are taken by the gospel authors to be "prophecies" of Jesus, and the stories of Jesus get written to fit ─ the examples I gave you from Matthew are both outrageous and unambiguous.
You ask why it is that the Jews have suffered for two thousand years
No, I ask why their own God would do this [his] own "Chosen People" ─ since the morality of it would be altogether vile, not to say absurd.
What is still more remarkable, is that Moses goes on to say 'That then [following repentance amongst Jews] the LORD thy God will turn thy captivity, and have compassion upon thee, and will return and gather thee from all the nations, whither the LORD thy God hath scattered thee.'
What is this, if not prophecy about the nation of Israel over a period of two thousand years?
A political slogan used by Zionists from the latter 19th century to the founding of Israel. Ancient possession is capable of being a powerful psychological tool for the dispossessed.