Why did the Jews reject their Messiah when he DID come?

[IndigoChild5559]

And then Christians say they don't believe in the Oral Torah and Rabbinic Tradition. Lol.

Protestants dishonestly don't even admit that they have their own oral traditions.

 

[Desert Snake]

God or G-d is a translation of El or Elohim, not the tetragrammaton.

It is still recognized via language, which is why sometimes, the 'g-d', the vowel is left out.

The Bible in English is not the Bible. It is a translation of the Bible.

...

 

[PruePhillip]

I don't think you know where Jews come from. The only thing we consider truly authoritative is the actual Hebrew and Jews start learning Hebrew in preschool. Our coming of age rite is reading from the Torah.

It is you that is dependent on English translations. The JPS version is for the benefit of folks like you.

So you are one of the KJV only folks. I've never understood that POV. The KJV is a translation of a translation and it thus one of the worse translations out there.

But whatever. I have shown you a translation truer to the Hebrew. If you reject that, then you reject the very notion of the original being "inspire of God" as you Christians say.

I don't' accept your argument. Translations are translations.

quote - "the Septuagint translates the word to "the things stored up for him""| Wikipedia.

But I can't figure out how Shiloh (if it was even called that in Jacob's day)
should "come" to Israel and the nations should trust in him. Balance of
probabilities is that Shiloh is a figure in Jacob's benediction.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

It is still recognized via language, which is why sometimes, the 'g-d', the vowel is left out.

...

What is recognized? You pronoun was undefined.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I don't' accept your argument. Translations are translations.

But you just said it there. A translation is a translation. It is not the original language, which is the language of what you would call the "inspired text." It is only an approximation.

 

[PruePhillip]

But you just said it there. A translation is a translation. It is not the original language, which is the language of what you would call the "inspired text." It is only an approximation.

Some of the "approximations" are fairly reasonable. It's hard to counter-interpret the life of Christ
for instance - it survives indifferent translations.
The thing with prophecies is that there are so many. Some will "argue" that Isaiah 53 speaks of
Israel as being the suffering Messiah. But you have to measure 53 against hundreds of similar
ones throughout the Old Testament. And there are "themes" of the bible that can't be reasoned
away, ie repentance, forgiveness, the promised land, God's love etc..

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Some of the "approximations" are fairly reasonable.

A fairly reasonable approximation is still just an approximation. Come on, you have to give me this, you know that.

It's hard to counter-interpret the life of Christ
for instance - it survives indifferent translations.

It really doesn't. But I'll let you Christians argue about whether kecharitomene translates as "full of grace" or not. Let the flamethrowing begin.

The thing with prophecies is that there are so many. Some will "argue" that Isaiah 53 speaks of Israel as being the suffering Messiah.

We say that Isaiah 53 refers to the remnant of Israel. We don't say that the remnant of Israel is the Messiah. Isaiah 53 is NOT messianic.

But you have to measure 53 against hundreds of similar
ones throughout the Old Testament. And there are "themes" of the bible that can't be reasoned away, ie repentance, forgiveness, the promised land, God's love etc..

No, there are NOT hundreds. You are imagining things. There are certainly themes of God calling Israel to repentance, punishing Israel for straying, and ultimately forgiving Israel and bringing us into the messianic era and the world to come. But almost nothing is said about the Messiah. And quite honestly, all of these themes absolutely pale in comparison to the one main theme of obeying God.

 

[PruePhillip]

It really doesn't. But I'll let you Christians argue about whether kecharitomene translates as "full of grace" or not. Let the flamethrowing begin..

Never heard of this. Some Catholics and Protestants argue over being saved by grace alone, as
if its even in the bible. But Jesus' life is there as an example, regardless of someone attempt to
interpret a verse here or there differently.

 

[PruePhillip]

A fairly reasonable approximation is still just an approximation. Come on, you have to give me this, you know that.

It really doesn't. But I'll let you Christians argue about whether kecharitomene translates as "full of grace" or not. Let the flamethrowing begin.

We say that Isaiah 53 refers to the remnant of Israel. We don't say that the remnant of Israel is the Messiah. Isaiah 53 is NOT messianic.


No, there are NOT hundreds. You are imagining things. There are certainly themes of God calling Israel to repentance, punishing Israel for straying, and ultimately forgiving Israel and bringing us into the messianic era and the world to come. But almost nothing is said about the Messiah. And quite honestly, all of these themes absolutely pale in comparison to the one main theme of obeying God.

So, as a Gentile today, I am redeemed by the suffering of the Jews? And these dead
Jews look down from heaven and are satisfied that the Gentiles who persecuted them
are now saved?
Okay... if you want to believe that.

Who is Job 19:25 speaking of?"
"I know that my Redeemer lives, and he shall stand on the earth in the latter day."

I… not someone else, me
Know… not believe, not think, not suppose, but know
My… not someone else's, mine
Redeemer… not a king, not a warrior, not a philosopher, not a nation
Lives … not did live, not will live, but live as in now
He … coming as a man
Shall… not maybe, not possibly
Stand… not recline, lie down - but stand for something
Earth … here, this place
Latter day… in the future.

500-1,000 years before Jesus.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Never heard of this. Some Catholics and Protestants argue over being saved by grace alone, as
if its even in the bible. But Jesus' life is there as an example, regardless of someone attempt to
interpret a verse here or there differently.

Actually they don't argue over grace alone. They argue over faith alone, and that's only because Protestants don't understand the Catholic teaching on initial justification.

IF you care to know about the kecharitomene thing, ask a Catholic apologist.

Prue: you really need to go visit some of these boards and watch while Christians tear each other to shreds. Your idea of some sort of Mere Christianity that unites all the Christian sects will soon vanish in the haze.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

So, as a Gentile today, I am redeemed by the suffering of the Jews?

Redeemed? What do you mean by redeemed? Do you mean you need to be forgiven?


If you have wronged someone, go to them and try to make it right. Do that before you even approach God. Then after you have done that, ask God for his mercy, by turning back to his ways and becoming obedient again unto him.

To obey is better than sacrifice.


Isaiah 53 doesn't speak at all about Gentiles. sorry. you aren't in the picture. It's not that God doesn't forgive Gentiles. Read Jonah. THAT talks about Gentiles.

 

[PruePhillip]

Redeemed? What do you mean by redeemed? Do you mean you need to be forgiven?


If you have wronged someone, go to them and try to make it right. Do that before you even approach God. Then after you have done that, ask God for his mercy, by turning back to his ways and becoming obedient again unto him.

To obey is better than sacrifice.


Isaiah 53 doesn't speak at all about Gentiles. sorry. you aren't in the picture. It's not that God doesn't forgive Gentiles. Read Jonah. THAT talks about Gentiles.

This is Israel, no?

Surely he took up our pain
and bore our suffering,
...

But he was pierced for our transgressions,
he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was on him,
and by his wounds we are healed.
...

and the Lord has laid on him
the iniquity of us all.
....

Yet it was the Lord’s will to crush him and cause him to suffer,
and though the Lord makes his life an offering for sin,
he will see his offspring and prolong his days,
and the will of the Lord will prosper in his hand.
After he has suffered,
he will see the light of life and be satisfied
…

For he bore the sin of many,
and made intercession for the transgressors.


So... if Isaiah isn't speaking of the Gentiles then who is he speaking of?

Here we have the Jews offering their life for... who... other Jews ??????
Those millions of Jews, for instance, who died in the great Roman wars,
were they among those who gave their lives for the salvation of other
Jews?
And after these millions died for the Jews, those living were sent into
slavery and exile for 1900 years. Were the dead Jews, who saw the
"light of life", really "satisfied"?

 

[sooda]

I don't' accept your argument. Translations are translations.

quote - "the Septuagint translates the word to "the things stored up for him""| Wikipedia.

But I can't figure out how Shiloh (if it was even called that in Jacob's day)
should "come" to Israel and the nations should trust in him. Balance of
probabilities is that Shiloh is a figure in Jacob's benediction.

Shiloh was an ancient city mentioned in the Bible. Its site is at modern Khirbet Seilun, south of ancient Tirzah and 25 miles (40 km) north of Jerusalem. It was the capital of Israel before the first Temple was built in Jerusalem.
Shiloh | Land of the Bible
www.land-bible.com/Shiloh/

 

[IndigoChild5559]

So... if Isaiah isn't speaking of the Gentiles then who is he speaking of?

He is speaking of the remnant of Israel suffering vicariously for all of Israel.

Like I said, Gentiles aren't even in the picture in Isaiah 53.

That doesn't mean that God doesn't care about Gentiles. It just means that there isn't a lot said about Gentiles in teh Tanakh. Remember that the Tanakh is a book written by Jews about Jews for Jews. But there are still some things written.

Everything before Abraham concerned Gentiles, so the fact that God i.e. saved Noah and promised never again to destroy the world by flood says something. Consider also Naaman who God healed from leprosy in his mercy. And then there is the entire city of Ninevah whom God sent their own prophet, Jonah, to preach them into repentance so that God would forgive rather than destroy them. Obviously if God wanted to forgive rather than destroy the evil city of Ninevah, so much so that he would send a prophet, he loves and cares for Gentiles too and wishes for you too to repent and return to his ways.

So this is what Judaism teaches for Gentiles -- to love God and to live righteous lives. You don't need to become a Jew to serve God. Just walk in his ways. Live rightly.

 

[PruePhillip]

Shiloh was an ancient city mentioned in the Bible. Its site is at modern Khirbet Seilun, south of ancient Tirzah and 25 miles (40 km) north of Jerusalem. It was the capital of Israel before the first Temple was built in Jerusalem.
Shiloh | Land of the Bible
www.land-bible.com/Shiloh/

And "the branch" is a grapevine
and "Michael" is just a name of someone not called Jesus
and "lamb of God" is just a young sheep with a halo
and "son of man" is a baby boy

etc..

 

[PruePhillip]

He is speaking of the remnant of Israel suffering vicariously for all of Israel.

Like I said, Gentiles aren't even in the picture in Isaiah 53.

That doesn't mean that God doesn't care about Gentiles. It just means that there isn't a lot said about Gentiles in teh Tanakh. Remember that the Tanakh is a book written by Jews about Jews for Jews. But there are still some things written.

Everything before Abraham concerned Gentiles, so the fact that God i.e. saved Noah and promised never again to destroy the world by flood says something. Consider also Naaman who God healed from leprosy in his mercy. And then there is the entire city of Ninevah whom God sent their own prophet, Jonah, to preach them into repentance so that God would forgive rather than destroy them. Obviously if God wanted to forgive rather than destroy the evil city of Ninevah, so much so that he would send a prophet, he loves and cares for Gentiles too and wishes for you too to repent and return to his ways.

So this is what Judaism teaches for Gentiles -- to love God and to live righteous lives. You don't need to become a Jew to serve God. Just walk in his ways. Live rightly.

So you are saying the death of one Jew can purge the sin of another Jew?
And not just any death, it says this person(s) was "pierced" (like in David's Psalms 22 and 69)
Only pierced Jews give their lives, and after they die they look down from heaven and are
satisfied - the dart thrust through them saved another Jew.
How does this work? Christians says Christ "once and for all" for His people. But many Jews
have been pierced (stabbed, crucified, speared, arrowed etc..) Maybe God has one Jew dying
for ten other Jews? Or one for one? One for a hundred?
I wonder if Gentiles can be pierced and die for other Gentiles?

 

[sooda]

And "the branch" is a grapevine
and "Michael" is just a name of someone not called Jesus
and "lamb of God" is just a young sheep with a halo
and "son of man" is a baby boy

etc..

Shiloh was a place of assemblage where the Ark of the Covenant was kept before the Temple was built. It was basically the house of God.

 

[sooda]

And "the branch" is a grapevine
and "Michael" is just a name of someone not called Jesus
and "lamb of God" is just a young sheep with a halo
and "son of man" is a baby boy

etc..

Shiloh was a place of assemblage where the Ark of the Covenant was kept before the Temple was built. It was basically the house of God.

 

[sooda]

And "the branch" is a grapevine
and "Michael" is just a name of someone not called Jesus
and "lamb of God" is just a young sheep with a halo
and "son of man" is a baby boy

etc..

Shiloh was a place of assemblage where the Ark of the Covenant was kept before the Temple was built. It was basically the house of God.

 

[PruePhillip]

Shiloh was a place of assemblage where the Ark of the Covenant was kept before the Temple was built. It was basically the house of God.

And The Logos was probably the first written word
Our Master probably was a foreman, boss, slave owner
Emmanuel could have been a Spanish beekeeper
The Lion of the Tribe of Judah could have been a zoo animal in Jerusalem
King of the Jews was likely Herod
Son of David was definitely King David's boy

When it says "dark clouds hung over Europe in 1939" I suppose it was a very
wet year.
The name of the Messiah is never mentioned once in the OT. He is spoke of
in allegory. There are literally hundreds of such names!

This link gives them as if in an alphabet.

All the Names of Jesus - Bible Resources


ps a bit of an echo here...