Try to study the text instead of rejecting it out of hand.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Why do you think the Jews rejected Jesus?
- Thread starter Lorgar-Aurelian
- Start date
-
- Tags
- christianity jesus jews judaism
Try to study the text instead of rejecting it out of hand.
jonathan180iq
Well-Known Member
For the same reason that Christians rejected Joseph Smith.
How accurate is the NRSV?
Because some people are arrogant, and rather then question what the text stated, they stick with their own personal version of events.
When shown alternative facts often many mock, scoff, and ridicule the information, proving even more so it is just hubris that has made them deny the facts.
Really feel sorry for many, as the text stipulated this is what is to happen to catch them all out (Isaiah 28:22, Isaiah 29:20, etc), and they still think they're being funny, when they're proving what it stated is true, and showing fulfillment of prophcey by their own arrogance.
So reading Old Testament scriptures regarding the messiah, comparing them to the life and times of Jesus, and saying that they don't correlate is arrogant?
And where is this mocking, scoffing and ridiculing you're talking about? What you are seeing is the rejection of the argument for Jesus as messiah.
Whenever opinions divide more or less predictably according to whether one is an insider in a faith based belief system or an outsider, the reason is always pretty much the same: The believers are being indoctrinated to believe something that they would have no reason to believe otherwise.
What do you think the fulfillment of the prophecy that Christians will be mocked signifies? A prescience only available to an omniscient deity? Let me see if I can do that. I'm going to prophecy that every new religion will be mocked by every pre-existing religion.
Of course not, arrogance is a word that defines a type of behavior; naively missing a correlation can happen to anyone, it is more if shown evidence, and the attitude is arrogant to seeing if there is merit to the information.
That would be fine if there was a cohesive argument, the most I've had off Jews is dismissal of all information; even going as far as saying, "maybe there is no God, no Moses, no Tanakh, so there look, you've got no evidence".
The name 'jesus' is a curse, not his real name Yehoshua/Yeshua...Which is commonly stated "your jesus", like he wasn't a Hebrew speaker and Jewish.
I've spent 13 years on my own studying, debating, and questioning scripture; I'm not a Christian, Muslim or Jew, yet can show why Yeshua is the Messiah.
Are you kidding? Christians are the Anti-Christ, they follow Paul, John and Simon the stone (petros), they've been deliberately set up as the Tanakh dictated to the letter.
The people who actually get Yeshua are persecuted, as Muslims, Christians and Jews all argue about him; yet no one other than maybe a few hippies really follow him.
Rejecting what out of hand? I implied that your comment was incomprehensible - the one that began with, "Jesus is the Son. Christ is not. Jesus is the Word(actually the logos); the word was God"and ended with "How much clearer can it be?"
Your first two sentences equate to Jesus is not Christ. Then you tell us that he is the word, and the word is a God.
Since according to you, Jesus is Immanuel, is Immanuel the word, God, Christ, Jesus, Jesus Christ, all of the above, or none of the above.
How much clearer can you be, you ask?
Maybe this will help loosen this linguistic knot. I was under the impression that the bird was the word:
You brought a wonderful Jefferson Airplane song to mind. He might be singling Silas instead of Simon, but I think you'll get the association. You''re going to like this song - Good Shepherd
Ingledsva
HEATHEN ALASKAN
Why do you folks keep quoting Joseph's genealogy?
You claim Jesus is miraculous from God, - no human male.
So, Jesus IS NOT from the Line of David.
And what you said up there in your reply - is ridiculous!
*
Ingledsva
HEATHEN ALASKAN
Luke 3:34 - is Joseph's genealogy - not Jesus'.
Tanakh, in Isaiah, says the mother will call her son Immanuel.
Mary called her son Jesus.
Not the same person. - As is obvious when you read Isaiah in context, - and per those lines that say BEFORE the child shall know the difference between good and evil - certain things will happen! They were in a war.
*
Last edited:
Ingledsva
HEATHEN ALASKAN
No it does not teach trinity. Later Christians teach trinity.
1. They originally had a God AND GODDESS.
2. They originally had multiple Gods just like the other people around them.
The terms are probably hold-overs from the above.
Note that the Elohiym created in THEIR image - male AND FEMALE.
We get our first specific Elohiym - YHVH - in Gen 2:4.
LOL!!! Only a Christian would come up with that. YHVH is mentioned many times in Tanakh - 6528 times to be exact, - and that is the ONLY verse in which three holies is used with him. Many say this is just an extension of the Hebrew habit of repeating things for "emphasis".
Look at that verse and the one above it, in the Hebrew.
Two seraphim with six wings each, - in twain, - put two each to three parts of the YHVH vision, calling them holy, holy, holy, or sacred, etc. Thus 12 wings cover 3. Nothing to do with Christian trinity God ideas. Look up the meaning of the three, face, feet/pudenda/ with twain he did fly.
Again - wrong line. Jesus isn't from it.
PS - Use the quote function. I can see with others you post to, that you know how to do it.
I'm tired of having to add your info in.
It is beginning to look like you don't want certain of us to be able to easily debate what you say?
*
Not even close.
What most do not understand that Jesus was both man and God at the same time, but a Jesus, he did not have the attributes of God, He was not omnipotent, omnipresent nor omniscient.
Ingledsva
HEATHEN ALASKAN
YHVH doesn't say that Jesus is the awaited Jewish Messiah. Jesus doesn't fulfill the requirements, - including being from the line of David. They don't know who is father is which automatically would disqualify him. His mother was found to be pregnant, - and NOT by Joseph.
Nope! Christian misinterpretation again. Satan is not evil in Tanakh. He is a servant of God. He is not the serpent in the Garden of Eden.
The "Nachash/serpent probably represents the other religions, possibly the Serpent religions. This would make the enmity between the seed of the new Hebrew, and the seed/people of other religions.
Why do you keep repeating this????? Repeating it doesn't change the facts.
That is Joseph's line, and he is NOT the father of Jesus. Thus Jesus is NOT from the line of David.
*
WE don't
I haven't made that claim
Yes He is.
What qualifies you to be the final word on what is ridiculous.
Jesus fulfilled over 25 Messianic prophecies. It is statistically impossible foe a non Messiah o do that.
Evidently you haven't read the book of Job. Evidently yoou don' know the meaning of "satan."
The "Nachash/serpent probably represents the other religions, possibly the Serpent religions. This would make the enmity between the seed of the new Hebrew, and the seed/people of other religions.<<
There were no other religions at that time.
Joseph was not from the line of David,but Mary was.
Ingledsva
HEATHEN ALASKAN
You obviously do - as it isn't Jesus' genealogy.
So now you are going to claim the Christian story about his birth is wrong? He is just the normal result of Mary and Joseph having sex?
Joseph being his father is the only way he can be from the genealogy you keep repeating, - and thus not God.
Explain how a genealogy leading to Joseph, is somehow a genealogy of Jesus, who IS NOT his son???
I'm not the final word. The Jews say Jesus was not their Messiah. He did not fulfill the prophecies.
They also note that Christians grab their texts out of context, and write crap that is NOT what they actually say, or mean.
*
Ingledsva
HEATHEN ALASKAN
Jesus and his followers had the Tanakh to copy. Jesus seems to have thought he was the awaited Messiah, - thus he tried to do what he thought the prophecies said he should do. However, he did NOT fulfill all the prophecies - as any Jewish site can tell you. Instead he was put to death.
I assure you I understand "satan." And have read Job, and debated the text here.
YHVH puts his servant Satan on Job. In the text. Job even tells us that YHVH is responsible for all that happened to him.
Job 1:8 And said YHVH to Satan, do put your regard upon my servant Job for there is none like him on the earth, a man pious and upright, fearing Elohiym and turning from wickedness.
Job 9:17 For he breaketh me with a tempest, and multiplieth my wounds without cause.
Job 10:8 Thine hands have made me and fashioned me together round about; yet thou dost destroy me.
Job 19:6 Know now that God hath overthrown me, and hath compassed me with his net.
Job 19:10 He hath destroyed me on every side, and I am gone: and mine hope hath he removed like a tree.
Job 19:11 He hath also kindled his wrath against me, and he counteth me unto him as one of his enemies.
Job 19:22 Why do ye persecute me God, and are not satisfied with my flesh?
Job 42:11 Then came there unto him all his brethren, and all his sisters, and all they that had been of his acquaintance before, and did eat bread with him in his house: and they bemoaned him, and comforted him over all the evil that the LORD had brought upon him: every man also gave him a piece of money, and every one an earring of gold.
Ingledsva said:
You are believing a ridiculous teaching tale to be true. These are teaching stories that were passed on and written down much later. Most conclude around the 6th century BC. Though shards of writing which may be an early Hebrew form, have been discovered, which are around 10th century BC. King David's time.
It goes through the male line.
*
Simply put -- if the Messiah was an expectation of the Jews, then surely they knew what they were looking for. If they didn't see what they were looking for, why would they accept?
We are free to believe what we want in regards to the bible. However, whether or not we can justify our beliefs is another story. Taking certain stories in the bible literally is simply implausible to many of us, and I think there is a reasonable level of agreement that some aspects of both the OT and NT are not to be taken literally. To reduce God to be the equivalent of the unconscious universe is too problematic so I would reject the idea, but I would defend your right to believe it and to propose arguments as to why it true.
I would say you have gone too far, as you are suggesting I have. Once we open the door to say that events recorded in the gospels may not literally be true, where does it end? Its an important question to ask.
I'm a Baha'i and so my ultimate authority is Baha'u'llah. However that will be meaningless to most Christians.
The next approach is to construct a narrative of the bible that respects:
(1) The existence of an All-Powerful, omniscient, Loving and Just God
(2) Jesus as the promised Messiah in the Hebrew bible
(3) Internally consistent with the bible in its entirety
(4) Is consistent with science and reason
(5) Takes into account world history and comparative religion
(5) Considers our experience living in a multicultural and global civilisation
Is that too much to ask for?
Hopefully I've addressed that question above, and of course do believe that the Jewish temple was destroyed in 70 AD.
I do see your point and it is an important one. I hope my answer addresses the concern to some extent.
There are odd lines where it appears they've got it, 'Stay out of the way of the blood-stained bandit'; yet most of it doesn't come across as they realize that John, Paul and Simon are the betrayers, that the made up Gospel of John, which tells Simon "to feed my sheep" is false.
Your lack of understanding does not means the Bible is wrong. It is called the genealogy of Jesus, so it is.
You should know by now, I don' claim anything in he Bible is wrong. The Bible says Joseph is not Jesus' father and he and Mary did not have sex until after Jesus was born.
The Bible says Joseph is not His father. The Bible says Joseph is no His father. They Bible says Joseph is not His father.
Show me where Jesus' genealogy includes Joseph.
He fulfilled over 25 Messianic prophesies. That is statistically impossible for anyone not the Messiah. He will complegt the list during His second coming.
They are wrong and you don't understand the Bible well enough to realize it.
Hosea 11:1 -/When Israel was a youth I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my Son.
Mt 2:14 - And he arose and took the child and His mother by night, and departed for 'Egypt, and was there until the death of Herod, that was spoken by the Lord through the prophet might be fulfilled, saying, "out of Egypt did I cll My Son.