Why Jews don't believe in Jesus

[muhammad_isa]

I don't give a rats behind what Islam teaches..

Well I care about what other people's religions are teaching.
It matters to me, and I think it matters to G-d.

We all have a conscience.

 

[muhammad_isa]

What is "quite clear" is your comfort with well worn antisemitic tropes, clear but unsurprising.

It seems to me, that when somebody doesn't like what is pointed out, they then cry "anti-semitism".

I have nothing against Jews .. but I have something against evil.
Clearly it is not only Jews who are involved with usury .. most of the world is !

Am I not allowed to speak out against what I consider to be evil ?
The Holy Roman Empire banned usury. It is only since the Reformation and
Industrial Revolution that followed, when it became 'the norm' .

We are choking ourselves with greed .. covid, climate disasters, wars .. G-d sees all.

 

[metis]

I think one major thing the law reveals is that no one is capable of keeping all the commandments all the time. Everyone falls short,

Which is why there's forgiveness, which is also a teaching within Judaism.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

It seems to me, that when somebody doesn't like what is pointed out, they then cry "anti-semitism".

It seems to me that when someone notices ignorant antisemitic tropes, they should expose them.

I have nothing against Jews ..

... nor against hypocrisy.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Am I not allowed to speak out against what I consider to be evil ?

Yes, as am I, and I consider few things as evil as antisemitism.

 

[Link]

By definition of homophobia and anti-Semitism people throw around, then Quran is definitely both. Don't care what people think first rule of pleasing God.

 

[LuisDantas]

By definition of homophobia and anti-Semitism people throw around, then Quran is definitely both. Don't care what people think first rule of pleasing God.

You realize that stance creates a genuine need to challenge those who believe in such a God?

 

[Link]

You realize that stance creates a genuine need to challenge those who believe in such a God?

They can do what they want. They can't extinguish the light of God no matter how much they try.

 

[LuisDantas]

They can do what they want. They can't extinguish the light of God no matter how much they try.

Or, much more likely, we (not "they") can't afford to trust the discernment of those who profess to believe in such a God.

And probably much else besides.

Such a shame.

 

[Link]

Or, much more likely, we (not "they") can't afford to trust the discernment of those who profess to believe in such a God.

And probably much else besides.

Such a shame.

It's hip to be an oppressor towards oppressed and side with oppressors these days. This is the reality of the west. The terminologies from "terrorist" to other things such as their usage of "human rights" is all to gear oppression.

 

[LuisDantas]

It's hip to be an oppressor towards oppressed and side with oppressors these days. This is the reality of the west. The terminologies from "terrorist" to other things is all to gear oppression.

It would be wise not to justify that perception.

Terrorism may or may not be the best word to describe the activities of those who are willing to go to extremes to show how sincerely they believe in the truth of Allah and of the Qur'an... but the deep danger and unfairness of keeping that stance is undeniable, regardless.

I sincerely regret that you refuse to understand that.

 

[Link]

It would be wise not to justify that perception.

I sincerely regret that you refuse to.

I don't care what people think. The Quran says "fears no blame of a blamer" in 5:54 and says in another places "and does not enrage a disbeliever except that..." as one of the things believers do.

This is part of the path. We can't appease the oppressor nor their supporters nor the apathetic to injustice, they are delusional and convinced of falsehood.

 

[Link]

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا مَنْ يَرْتَدَّ مِنْكُمْ عَنْ دِينِهِ فَسَوْفَ يَأْتِي اللَّهُ بِقَوْمٍ يُحِبُّهُمْ وَيُحِبُّونَهُ أَذِلَّةٍ عَلَى الْمُؤْمِنِينَ أَعِزَّةٍ عَلَى الْكَافِرِينَ يُجَاهِدُونَ فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ وَلَا يَخَافُونَ لَوْمَةَ لَائِمٍ ۚ ذَٰلِكَ فَضْلُ اللَّهِ يُؤْتِيهِ مَنْ يَشَاءُ ۚ وَاللَّهُ وَاسِعٌ عَلِيمٌ | O you who have faith! Should any of you desert his religion, Allah will soon bring a people whom He loves and who love Him, [who will be] humble towards the faithful, stern towards the faithless, doing jihad in the way of Allah, not fearing the blame of any blamer. That is Allah’s grace, which He grants to whomever He wishes, and Allah is all-bounteous, all-knowing. | Al-Maaida : 54

مَا كَانَ لِأَهْلِ الْمَدِينَةِ وَمَنْ حَوْلَهُمْ مِنَ الْأَعْرَابِ أَنْ يَتَخَلَّفُوا عَنْ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ وَلَا يَرْغَبُوا بِأَنْفُسِهِمْ عَنْ نَفْسِهِ ۚ ذَٰلِكَ بِأَنَّهُمْ لَا يُصِيبُهُمْ ظَمَأٌ وَلَا نَصَبٌ وَلَا مَخْمَصَةٌ فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ وَلَا يَطَئُونَ مَوْطِئًا يَغِيظُ الْكُفَّارَ وَلَا يَنَالُونَ مِنْ عَدُوٍّ نَيْلًا إِلَّا كُتِبَ لَهُمْ بِهِ عَمَلٌ صَالِحٌ ۚ إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَا يُضِيعُ أَجْرَ الْمُحْسِنِينَ | It is not fitting for the people of Madinah and the Bedouins around them to hang back behind the Apostle of Allah and prefer their own lives to his life. That is because they neither experience any thirst, nor fatigue, nor hunger, in the way of Allah, nor do they tread any ground enraging the faithless, nor do they gain any ground against an enemy but a righteous deed is written for them on its account. Indeed Allah does not waste the reward of the virtuous. | At-Tawba : 120

 

[Dimi95]

The Messiah must be from David's line and from the tribe of Judah, Jesus was not.

He is.
But this discussion is sensitive and requires a little bit of time so the reader can understand the point.

The Messiah must rebuild the temple

Define tample.

, the temple still stood when Jesus lived.

Oh , you mean the construction.
In that case , it still stood.

The Messiah must reunite the Jews, the Jews were not even scattered when Jesus lived.

He united a large group , and that is how Christianity was born.
Christianity came out as consequennce of the teachings of certain group of Jewish people and their teachings came as consequence of Jesus' ministry.
The Apostles were Jewish , don't forget.

The Messiah must be Jewish... duh.

He is.

The Messiah will establish world peace and rule justly

He did , on the cross.
But many think a ruler will come who will sit on some chair and rule like a politician

, Jesus did not do this.

Yes he did.

The Messiah will rule when the Torah is written in everyone's heart and all people acknowledge Hashem as G-d, Jesus did not do this.

Matthew 5 , Matthew 22

In addition Jews do not accept the notion of a trinity or original sin.

Orthodox Christianity does not belive that the Son bears the guilt of his Father.
It's simple as that.

And that doctrine is not so easy to understand.It's an issue itself inside Christianity.

We do not believe G-d will assume a human form. Nowhere in Messianic prophecy is the Messiah G-d in human form or otherwise.

Then with who did Abraham speak?

Jews also do not believe anyone can assume responsibility for the sins of another.

Do you mean take responsibility or?

G-d also calls human sacrifice an abomination and condemns it in the strongest possible terms. There is nothing in Messianic prophecy about the Messiah dying and coming back at a later date, it says he will finish the job.

Isaiah 53

There's more, but that's a primer for anyone interested.

Where does this more come from in the first place?

 

[InChrist]

Many Christians like to allude to the notion that the holocaust was something Jews brought on themselves.

And many Christians don’t think that way, rather that the Holocaust was one of the worst evils to ever take place, where Jews were falsely blamed and targeted as scapegoats. I just hope Jews and non-Jews alike remember to … Never Forget.

 

[Spice]

Thank you. I was thinking more where it is said in OT, but that is also good scripture. Although I think this also can leave room for speculation, if we look all other scriptures also.

I think sinful is the opposite of righteous, because:

…He who does righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous. He who sins is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning from the beginning. To this end the Son of God was revealed, that he might destroy the works of the devil. Whoever is born of God doesn't commit sin, because his seed remains in him; and he can't sin, because he is born of God. In this the children of God are revealed, and the children of the devil. Whoever doesn't do righteousness is not of God, neither is he who doesn't love his brother.
1 John 3:7-10

And righteousness means wisdom of the just, and then sinner means the opposite, a person without that wisdom of the just. If person doesn't have the wisdom, it leads to bad actions that then can be called sin, and sin is what sinner does as righteousness is what righteous does.

But, making a mistake is not necessary a sin, because also righteous person can fail:

For a righteous man falls seven times, and rises up again; But the wicked are overthrown by calamity.
Prov. 24:16

I think the difference between righteous and sinner is, righteous doesn't reject God, even when he fails. Righteous person will be sorry and ask forgiveness, when he sees he has done wrongly (like for example David). Sinner doesn't care. This is why I think sin means actually rejecting God, or to be without God. And that can lead to many wrong actions that then can also be called sin.

Everyone who sins also commits lawlessness. Sin is lawlessness.
1 John 3:4

Don't you agreed that everyone is a sinner? And yet righteous do exist. So I don't see those as opposites.

 

[muhammad_isa]

..rather that the Holocaust was one of the worst evils a to ever take place, where Jews were falsely blamed and targeted as scapegoats..

I agree wholeheartedly.

 

[Eliana]

He is.
But this discussion is sensitive and requires a little bit of time so the reader can understand the point.

Define tample.


Oh , you mean the construction.
In that case , it still stood.

I don't know what a tample is, but I presume to mean temple. A temple is a large building where people of faith gather to worship together. Is there another definition I'm unaware of? Regardless the temple still stood when Jesus lived, therefore if he was the messiah he came way too early.

He united a large group , and that is how Christianity was born.
Christianity came out as consequennce of the teachings of certain group of Jewish people and their teachings came as consequence of Jesus' ministry.
The Apostles were Jewish , don't forget.

The Tanakh doesn't say the messiah will gather a group of people and invent a new religion. It says he was reunite ALL the Jewish people in Israel and rebuild the temple. Jesus did not do this. His apostles were not Jewish, they were apostates.

He is.

A TORAH observant Jew, which he was not.

He did , on the cross.
But many think a ruler will come who will sit on some chair and rule like a politician

No he didn't. You will notice war still exists and so does injustice and paganism. The messiah does away with all this.

Isaiah 2:1-4

1 The word that Isaiah, son of Amoz, prophesied concerning Judah and Jerusalem.
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 all the nations shall stream to it.
3 And many peoples shall go, and they shall say, "Come, let us go up to the Lord's mount, 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 And he shall judge between the nations and reprove many peoples, and they shall beat their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks; nation shall not lift the sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore.

Yes he did.

Apparently not given there is still war and paganism.

Matthew 5 , Matthew 22

I don't give a flying fig what the bible says.

Orthodox Christianity does not belive that the Son bears the guilt of his Father.
It's simple as that.

And that doctrine is not so easy to understand. It's an issue itself inside Christianity.

Christianity teaches Jesus died for everyone's sins and people must accept that sacrifice to go to heaven. G-d says in the Torah that human sacrifice is an abomination.

Leviticus 35:33
And you shall not corrupt the land in which you live, for the blood corrupts the land, and the blood which is shed in the land cannot be atoned for except through the blood of the one who shed it.

Deuteronomy 12:31
You shall not do so to the Lord, your God; for every abomination to the Lord which He hates, they did to their gods, for also their sons and their daughters they would burn in fire to their gods.

Deuteronomy 24:16
Fathers shall not be put to death because of sons, nor shall sons be put to death because of fathers; each man shall be put to death for his own transgression.

Jeremiah 7:31
And they have built the high places of Topheth which are in the valley of Ben-Hinnom, to burn their sons and daughters with fire, which I did not ordain, neither did it enter My mind.

Then with who did Abraham speak?

Messengers of G-d i.e. angels. One was specifically pointed out to be a messenger speaking for G-d. The Hebrew even describes them as such.

Exodus 33:20
And He said, "You will not be able to see My face, for man shall not see Me and live."

Obviously is wasn't G-d or Abraham and Sarah would be dead upon looking at him.

Do you mean take responsibility or?

You
Can't
Take
Responsibility
For
Someone
Else's
Sin

Where's the confusion? See the verses above.

Isaiah 53

What about it?

Where does this more come from in the first place?

It's called the Tanakh, the Jewish scriptures. Google it.

 

[YellowFeather]

The Holy Spirit is the one that got Mary Pregnant, and then an Angel of Jehovah, told David that Mary was begotten by the Holy Spirit. That was so Joseh would understand that Mary is still a virgin and belongs to him. Joseph was to have no intercourse with her until the birth of Jesus. Read Mathew Chapter 1: 18 to 25.

 

[metis]

The significance of article nine is that it conflates men with persons, which is meaningful in the context of the union of church and state, since the state treats men as if they were persons and the natural rights of men relate to deity. This loss of status was known as capitis deminutio in Roman law.

But that doesn't deal with the issue of "original sin".

Basically, I believe that it's more likely a theological construct coupled with the sacrament of Baptism. On the logical level exclusively, it makes no sense as we don't execute a grandchild because Grampa sinned.