Jesus Failed Right?

[InChrist]

There are hints of it early in the 2nd century, just none in the gospels or Paul, where those express denials I mentioned can be found.


No, as I mentioned, the form it should take was much disputed beforehand.


No, that's just an attempt at retrofit. What the author of Matthew did was mention Father, Jesus and Ghost in one sentence. Nothing in Matthew suggests they only have one identity.


They're the words of the Tanakh. As I may have mentioned, in my view the Jewish religion has the Tanakh as its book, and if you want to know what it means theologically you should ask a Jewish authority.

Paul was Jewish, a Pharisee who knew and believed in the Tanakh and ONE God, yet he came to know and worship Jesus Christ.
I have listened to numerous accounts by Jewish people who have also…

I MET MESSIAH (Jewish Testimonies)

ONE FOR ISRAEL is an initiative of native-born Israelis on the forefront of high-tech media evangelism, proclaiming salvation to Israel, raising up spiritual leaders through ONE FOR ISRAEL’s Bible College and equipping them with the tools they need to transform our communities.

www.oneforisrael.org

What is God sitting in [his] chair doing, in fact? As I may have asked you, is [he] cheering for the Israelis and approving the grotesque toll of Gazan citizens? Does [he] prefer Russian or Ukrainian Orthodoxy? Why is there no sign of divine will in either of those places (not to mention the rest of the world)?

I’m not getting off on the wars taking place in this world or what side God is on or not. No doubt God is simply letting humans sin play out, the consequences are evident everywhere. God is calling people to turn from sin and evil.

I keep on asking what dying on the cross has to do with it, but I never seem to get a clear answer. An omnipotent God making a human sacrifice to [him]self is found in both the Tanakh and the NT, but I simply fail to understand why.


By what means will that new world by any more free of human vices, moral or genetic, than the present one is?

For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Romans 6:23

The purpose of the cross was to pay the penalty of sin and offer freedom and eternal life to all who receive. The new heaven and earth will be perfectly sin free… because it will only be inhabited by those who have chosen Jesus Christ to save, deliver and transform their lives for eternity.

Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; old things have passed away; behold, all things have become new.
2 Corinthians 5:17

 

[Ebionite]

The purpose of the cross was to pay the penalty of sin and offer freedom and eternal life to all who receive.

This doctrine is not supported by the pre-existent law. For example, a passover seder involved unleavened bread, but In the gospels the term leaven was used to describe the hypocrisy of the Pharisees, and yet the doctrine draws extensively from Paul of Tarsus, who claimed to be a Pharisee well after he was teaching Christian doctrine.

And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.
John 6:35

Then understood they how that he bade [them] not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.
Matthew 16:12

 

[blü 2]

Paul was Jewish, a Pharisee who knew and believed in the Tanakh and ONE God, yet he came to know and worship Jesus Christ.
I have listened to numerous accounts by Jewish people who have also…

Worship Jesus but not as God ─

1 Corinthians 8:6 yet for us there is one God, the Father, from whom are all things and for whom we exist, and one Lord, Jesus Christ, through whom are all things and through whom we exist.

Philippians 2:11 and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.

I’m not getting off on the wars taking place in this world or what side God is on or not. No doubt God is simply letting humans sin play out, the consequences are evident everywhere. God is calling people to turn from sin and evil.

That sounds realistic. Prayers may console in peacetime but they don't actually work in reality at a rate greater than chance. Prayers may console in wartime but they don't actually work in reality either.

For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Romans 6:23

Where does Paul get the notion from that the wages of sin are death? From the Garden story in Genesis? That never mentions sin and it's quite specific that death was always part of the plan (otherwise a Tree of Life would be meaningless).

The purpose of the cross was to pay the penalty of sin and offer freedom and eternal life to all who receive.

But that would be an absurd way to do it, There are people living all over the world who've never encountered Christianity and this is some two thousand years down the track. An all-including God would have thought of some way to tell EVERYONE what the new deal was going to be, not just a small sect of people who happened to be in Jerusalem at the right time.

And that still doesn't explain why any death was necessary at all. Consider ─ God makes a human sacrifice of [his] son to [himself] with no lasting consequences to the son who then proceeds up to heaven (or in the case of Paul's and John's Jesuses, back up to heaven).

 

[Ebionite]

Where does Paul get the notion from that the wages of sin are death?

The idea isn't a big secret in Judaism.

The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.
But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die.
Ezekiel 18:20-21

it's quite specific that death was always part of the plan

No, they had free will back in the garden.

 

[blü 2]

The soul that sinneth, it shall die.

But that's from Ezekiel 18, and the entire chapter is about how sin CAN'T be inherited. Were a notion of original sin to be found in the Tanakh, Ezekiel 18 would directly contradict it, make it impossible.

No, they had free will back in the garden.

The Garden story is not about sin, and never mentions it even once. It says that God got Adam and Eve booted out of the Garden for one and only one reason, lest they should become like [him] and live forever by eating the fruit of the Tree of Life.

As for having free will, it's expressly stated that God deprived both Adam and Eve of the knowledge of good and evil. This made it impossible for either of them to intend to do wrong, hence impossible for them to sin; and this state of affairs existed at the time each of them tasted the fruit.

 

[Ebionite]

But that's from Ezekiel 18, and the entire chapter is about how sin CAN'T be inherited. Were a notion of original sin to be found in the Tanakh, Ezekiel 18 would directly contradict it, make it impossible.

Yes, the doctrine of original sin is built on Paul's misrepresentation of David's sin (Romans 3, Psalm 51). The doctrine isn't supported by the Tanak itself.

The Garden story is not about sin, and never mentions it even once.

It's about death, and death is related to sin via Ezekiel 18.

 

[blü 2]

Yes, the doctrine of original sin is built on Paul's misrepresentation of David's sin (Romans 3, Psalm 51). The doctrine isn't supported by the Tanak itself.

According to my reading the "original sin" notion surfaced among the Jews of Alexandria practicing the midrash tradition, late in the 2nd century BCE. Thus (a) its origins are from a practice unambiguously fanciful and imaginative, and (b) have no origin in the Tanakh and (c) were mentioned by Paul once or twice briefly but don't originate with him and (d) didn't take flight as a common Christian notion till Augustine fell in love with it c. 400 CE.

It's about death, and death is related to sin via Ezekiel 18.

I disagree. But even were you correct, Ezekiel 18 says unambiguously that sin can't be inherited. Hence there's no possibility of original sin with a scriptural origin.

On the other hand, you can see the appeal to the evangelists. It's the perfect element for snake oil salesmanship: Hey everyone, although you don't know it, you're terribly, incurably sick and appalling disaster is staring you in the face and there's nothing you can do about it. But very fortunately I and I alone have the only remedy (&c &c).

 

[Ajax]

How do you know how many have converted?

By the statements of that time:

Acts 17:6
But when they did not find them, they dragged Jason and some brethren to the rulers of the city, crying out, “These who have turned the world upside down have come here too.

Doesn’t sound like a few to me.

There are popular (not necessarily scholarly) estimates that by 100 CE there were perhaps 10,000 Christians. With the estimated number of Jews in the Roman Empire at the time floating around 5-10 million, the number of Christians for its first hundred years of existence was extremely insignificant, with a handful of leaders spread across a few dozen communities, and that's without even discussing how many of those Christians were Jews as opposed to Gentile followers of this new religion.

Rather, from looking at Jewish documents we see that Christianity was not a serious consideration or threat to the Jewish community in these early centuries. Christianity was just one of dozens of small, wayward first century movements that would have faded into obscurity had they not aggressively pursued Gentile believers.

Select sources:

Thomas A. Robinson - Who Were the First Christians? Dismantling the Urban Thesis, Chp 4, Counting the Jewish Population, Also his work Ignatius of Antioch and the Parting of the Ways: Early Jewish-Christian Relations

Salo Baron - A Social and Religious History of the Jews

Ramsey MacMullen, Christianizing the Roman Empire

Siegal, Michal Bar-Asher (2019). Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud

David Levinson - Messianic Movements & Daniel Schwartz Jewish Movements of the New Testament Period

It is only evident to you because it is your position that he failed. I have given evidence that he didn’t. Now, if you are dogmatic in your position then we can agree to disagree. But you certainly haven’t given any evidence of your position.

Don't be silly, you have given no evidence whatsoever by quoting Acts that 3000, then 5000, then increasing the number of converts to an unknown number, when as I showed you that the Jewish population at the time was 5-7 million people. The total conversion of Jews was way below 2%. The Jews were not silly. They knew that Jesus didn't fulfill any of the requirement for Messiah, apart from being Jewish himself. Naming somebody Messiah out of nowhere, does not make one Messiah.
Therefore he failed dramatically to convert the Jews.

 

[Ajax]

Ignoring the facts about the righteous servant only serves to show that your position is religious, not rational.

This interpretation states that the servant is a metaphor for the entire nation of Israel. The sufferings of the servant are seen as sufferings of the nation as a whole while in exile.
Be careful the next time you try to interpret scripture.

 

[Ajax]

It's about being able to support your position with facts ans reason, not some weak inuendo.

I'm always using facts. On the other hand is the fundamentalist Christians who are trying to manipulate and misinterpret every supposedly "prophecy" to show that it was meant for Jesus, which in my opinion is pathetic.

 

[Ebionite]

I disagree.

What, specifically, do you disagree with?

 

[Ajax]

The lost sheep of Israel were the scattered descendants of the ancient tribes of Israel. . .ten of the twelve original tribes scattered since onquered by the Assyrian King Shalmaneser V. . .the tribes of Israel in Jesus's day were Judah, what was left of Benjamin, (and a few of the priestly tribe of Levi). All others had been displaced centuries prior. This is who Jesus was referring to in both statements.

No, you are wrong. On his second statement Jesus told the disciples to go to the towns of Israel. Israel at that time was Palestine.

 

[Ebionite]

This interpretation states that the servant is a metaphor for the entire nation of Israel.

No, my interpretation is about the righteous servant. The nation of Israel was never described as being righteous.

Be careful the next time you try to interpret scripture.

It would be helpful if you actually responded to what I posted instead of making **** up.

I'm always using facts.

You weren't using any relevant facts in your #310.

 

[PearlSeeker]

Physical death in this temporal world is just a physical picture or reminder of a far worse spiritual death. Death in the scriptures refers to eternal separation from God, the Source of life, love, beauty, joy, and all goodness.

According to the scriptures, Jesus paid for the sins of the world, but that payment is not applied your sins until you trust Jesus as your Savior and accept His forgiveness and payment personally.

If it's not physical death why then payment with physical death?

 

[metis]

I don't know what you mean by BAR? Is that a book or an author?

Magazine

www.biblicalarchaeology.org

It is based on the science of archaeology, thus not linked to any religion nor denomination.

There's been numerous issues dealing with the Canaanites.

 

[Enai de a lukal]

You can't understand Jesus of Nazareth (i.e. the historic equivalent to the BIblical figure) without understanding the relevant context. During Jesus's lifetime, life for Jews especially in Jerusalem was very poor. Their country was controlled and occupied by the Roman empire, contrary to the Biblical Davidic covenant assuring Jews that a member of that line would always hold the kingship.

For Jews at that time, the messiah- a term referring to the King of Israel, "messiah" means "anointed one" and refers to the holy oils the king is anointed with upon his ascension- was expected to defeat and expel the romans and re-establish Israel as a sovereign nation. This was what a messiah was, a military/political figure (the only religious overtones own to the fact that the Israelites control over Jerusalem is sanctioned and promised by God).

Moreover, many Jews, including Jesus himself, his mentor John the Baptist, and at least some of his disciplines including/especially Paul, were apocalypticists: they believed that the world they knew was soon to end, and that God was going to descend in power and establish a good kingdom here on Earth. Jesus believed this was coming soon, within the lifetime of the present generation (e.g. Matthew 24:34).

And so the entire purpose of Jesus's mission was to spread the message that the Kingdom of Heaven was coming soon, and that people needed to clean up their acts and start getting straight with God so that they could be among those rewarded when the time comes rather than among those punished. TO this end, he encouraged people to sell their belongings, help the poor, and so on.

Now we know fairly reliably that he had 12 disciples, as well as a small/loose collection of supporters and hangers-on. Scholars think the Jesus movement was originally quite small. But I'm not sure we have any way of knowing how many people Jesus and his followers successfully convinced to sell their belongings and prepare for the incoming Good Kingdom. And of course that Good Kingdom never arrived. So, did Jesus fail? I mean, I guess, in a sense- the thing he wanted everyone to prepare for never happened. And he never really got people to act the way he wanted them to act, i.e. morally/ethically. But he did have a religion named after him, a religion which has almost nothing to do with the person or views of the actual Jesus.

So I suppose whether Jesus failed or not is a question where YMMV.

 

[Kenny]

There are popular (not necessarily scholarly) estimates that by 100 CE there were perhaps 10,000 Christians. With the estimated number of Jews in the Roman Empire at the time floating around 5-10 million, the number of Christians for its first hundred years of existence was extremely insignificant, with a handful of leaders spread across a few dozen communities, and that's without even discussing how many of those Christians were Jews as opposed to Gentile followers of this new religion.

It is interesting that the Book of Acts (written by someone of that time) basically said that there were a minimum of 10,000 in less than one year where the “popular” estimates it at 100 AD. I wonder why it is popular.

And isn’t it interesting that so few Christians turned the whole world into a different direction. I think if we look at the history of the Apostles, we can establish that the figures you are offering don’t match the history of their lives and the Books of Acts

Rather, from looking at Jewish documents we see that Christianity was not a serious consideration or threat to the Jewish community in these early centuries. Christianity was just one of dozens of small, wayward first century movements that would have faded into obscurity had they not aggressively pursued Gentile believers.

Select sources:

Thomas A. Robinson - Who Were the First Christians? Dismantling the Urban Thesis, Chp 4, Counting the Jewish Population, Also his work Ignatius of Antioch and the Parting of the Ways: Early Jewish-Christian Relations

Salo Baron - A Social and Religious History of the Jews

Ramsey MacMullen, Christianizing the Roman Empire

Siegal, Michal Bar-Asher (2019). Jewish-Christian Dialogues on Scripture in Late Antiquity: Heretic Narratives of the Babylonian Talmud

David Levinson - Messianic Movements & Daniel Schwartz Jewish Movements of the New Testament Period

I don’t think that looking at Jewish sources, who eventually were at odds with Christians (especially because of the horrible things that “Christians” did to Jewish people in the Dark Ages,) invalidates the other sources or the book of Acts for that matter.

The reality is that there is no way to determine the number of people who follow Christ.

Don't be silly, you have given no evidence whatsoever by quoting Acts that 3000, then 5000, then increasing the number of converts to an unknown number, when as I showed you that the Jewish population at the time was 5-7 million people. The total conversion of Jews was way below 2%. The Jews were not silly. They knew that Jesus didn't fulfill any of the requirement for Messiah, apart from being Jewish himself. Naming somebody Messiah out of nowhere, does not make one Messiah.
Therefore he failed dramatically to convert the Jews.

I think you have simply convinced yourself of your position and then found people who supported your position and threw out what didn’t support your position.

Why do you think that Jesus effort was to “convert the Jews”? Yes, I know He came to preach to His own… but it was already written that He would be rejected and despised.

So I think if we look at what He came to “accomplish”, he was quite successful.

 

[InChrist]

If it's not physical death why then payment with physical death?

Because we are physically human and Jesus was paying the death penalty for all humanity and offers new-eternal life.

Therefore, just as through one man sin entered the world, and death through sin, and thus death spread to all men, because all sinned— 13 (For until the law sin was in the world, but sin is not imputed when there is no law. 14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned according to the likeness of the transgression of Adam, who is a type of Him who was to come. 15 But the free gift is not like the offense. For if by the one man’s offense many died, much more the grace of God and the gift by the grace of the one Man, Jesus Christ, abounded to many. 16 And the gift isnot like that which came through the one who sinned. For the judgment which came from one offense resulted in condemnation, but the free gift which came from many offenses resulted in justification. 17 For if by the one man’s offense death reigned through the one, much more those who receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness will reign in life through the One, Jesus Christ. Romans 5:12-17

I believe there was much more occurring than just the physical death of Christ on the cross and think the spiritual suffering was much more intense and Jesus will always bear the weight of human sinfulness, so we can be free…

“Two aspects of the death of Christ show something of the mystery of His death and the suffering He took onto Himself for our sake. The death of Jesus on the cross took but six hours as measured in dynamical time. Jesus was, for the first three hours on the cross, our Great High Priest. From noon till 3 P.M., during which time a strange and terrible darkness came over the earth, the High Priest became the Sacrifice.

If we now consider the nature of time and eternity (see Arthur C. Custance, Journey out of Time, Ref. 2) it must surely become clear that what was (for us) three hours' suffering by Jesus in total estrangement from the Father---was for Jesus an event in eternity which never ends. The work of Jesus on the cross, as far as we are concerned, is completely finished. Jesus is not now hanging on a cross. He has been raised from the dead, and sits in heaven, fully in charge of the universe as a resurrected man. One man, one son of Adam, Jesus the Lord is now living in glory and He is in charge of the universe.

But in another sense, if we could step into eternity and view an eternal being such as the Son of God experiencing life---if we could see things from the vantage point of eternity---then we would perceive that a part of the eternal God must suffer forever, outside of time, because of human sin.”

Jesus' Death: Six Hours of Eternity on the Cross

 

[Ajax]

No, my interpretation is about the righteous servant. The nation of Israel was never described as being righteous.

That's your wrong opinion, because you want it to mean for Jesus, but I'm afraid it is for Israel.

Isaiah 1:26-27
I will restore your judges as at the first,
And your counselors as at the beginning.
Afterward you shall be called the city of righteousness, the faithful city.”

Isaiah 33:5-6
The LORD is exalted, for He dwells on high;
He has filled Zion with justice and righteousness.

Isaiah 61:3
To console those who mourn in Zion,
To give them beauty for ashes,
The oil of joy for mourning,
The garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness;
That they may be called trees of righteousness,

 

[Ebionite]

That's your wrong opinion, because you want it to mean for Jesus, but I'm afraid it is for Israel.

You don't know what you're talking about. Israel is not Zion.