Why Jews don't believe in Jesus

[InChrist]

I don’t see it that way, rather Christianity or the revelation of Jesus Christ to the world was built upon the prophecy and promises given to Israel.

 

[I Am Hugh]

Modern Judaism has run away from the Pharisees, possibly to a fault.

Oh, I'm sure it has. That's the nature of syncretistic religious tradition. I was talking about the root. In Judaism Moses becomes Rabbi. Alexander's influence beginning in 332 BCE was hardly the beginning of apostacy. The Bible makes that astoundingly clear. But what became the traditions of Judaism was a deviation from what Moses taught just as the same influence in Christianity after Constantine in 325 CE wasn't the beginning of apostasy in Christianity, as Paul himself pointed out in 1 Timothy 4:7; 2 Timothy 4:3-4; Titus 1:14.

Now, I know this is a debate forum, and that's great. I love debate, but I'm not telling you your traditions are wrong I'm just saying the data I have says one thing and your tradition sometimes says another. I've been wrong plenty. Usually, errors are corrected because of the data I receive through debate.

I love being wrong in that respect. Hate/love thing. I hate it at first.

It's much more accurate to say that Christianity is the Pharisees because Christian theology comes from Paul the Pharisee who wrote the epistles.

I suppose that is arguable. Not an argument that would be terribly interesting to me itself, although I do find the discussion of what difference that would entail somewhat interesting. Paul was a Jew, of course, a Pharisee and a Christian. Theologically not much difference. Traditionally or religiously perhaps different.

If you have a problem with the Pharisees, you should have a problem with the Gospel of John and the epistles. So? Do you?

No, I don't have a problem with anyone. Just the data.

 

[I Am Hugh]

^^ Self-Promotion ^^

Is better than promoting someone else.

 

[I Am Hugh]

That's not the original language.

That is irrelevant.

You're not reading the word of The Most High.

I'm reading the imperfect fallible translation of the perfect infallible. As are you. Anyone can look it (Hebrew) up. I see the superstitious adherence to certain Hebrew words in discussions like this as a sort of pedantic superstition masking as, even worse, quasi academia.

In fact, you seem to be running away from it.

I run away from nothing.

 

[I Am Hugh]

You're wrong. You don't know the Torah or the post Biblical tradition. You're parroting man-made anti-Jewish doctrine.

There it is. The no defense defense. Took you long enough to get to the real issue. I have some respect, though little interest in religious tradition, but if your tradition doesn't match the data or you can't support it, don't use lame excuses. They don't mean anything to me.

 

[Betho_br]

The christological mission of Jesus is clearly focused on the people of Israel who were not fully aware of the law and needed guidance and care.

1. Matthew 2:6 - This verse cites a prophecy about a leader being born in Bethlehem who will shepherd the people of Israel. The reference to Jesus as a "shepherd" indicates his role in guiding and caring for his people.

2. Matthew 10:6 - Here, Jesus instructs his disciples to go specifically to the "lost sheep of Israel." This suggests that his mission was aimed at Israelites who were lost or not fully acquainted with God's message.

3. Matthew 15:24 - Jesus states that his mission was solely for the "lost sheep of Israel." He emphasizes that his priority was those who were spiritually lost or lacking adequate guidance, rather than those who were already familiar with the law.

4. Luke 1:16 - This verse speaks of a mission to bring many Israelites back to the Lord, indicating a focus on restoring those who were distant from proper practice and knowledge of the law.

Taken together, these verses suggest that Jesus' mission was centered on restoring and guiding the Israelites who were straying or lacked a complete understanding of the law, rather than focusing on those who were already observing the law. This highlights the need for a "shepherd" for those who were lost, rather than for those who were already knowledgeable and practicing the law.

In the encounter with the rich young man, which is recorded in the Gospels, Jesus responds to his question about eternal life by directing him to the commandments of the Law:

1. Matthew 19:16-17 - "Just then a man came up to Jesus and asked, 'Teacher, what good thing must I do to get eternal life?' 'Why do you ask me about what is good?' Jesus replied. 'There is only One who is good. If you want to enter life, keep the commandments.'"
2. Mark 10:17-19 - "As Jesus started on his way, a man ran up to him and fell on his knees before him. 'Good teacher,' he asked, 'what must I do to inherit eternal life?' 'Why do you call me good?' Jesus answered. 'No one is good—except God alone. You know the commandments: 'You shall not murder, You shall not commit adultery, You shall not steal, You shall not give false testimony, You shall not defraud, Honor your father and mother.'"
3. Luke 18:18-20 - "A certain ruler asked him, 'Good teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?' 'Why do you call me good?' Jesus answered. 'No one is good—except God alone. You know the commandments: 'You shall not commit adultery, You shall not murder, You shall not steal, You shall not give false testimony, Honor your father and mother.'"

In these passages, Jesus emphasizes that to inherit eternal life, one should keep the commandments of the Law. This response underscores the significance of following the Law as a foundational aspect of righteousness and eternal life. It highlights that Jesus’ mission involved guiding individuals towards fulfilling the Law, which was a key aspect of his message to Israel.

Therefore, Jews who observe the Law already believe in Jesus, as this was the primary christological mission of Jesus. It is impossible for a devout Jew of the Law not to believe in Jesus, even if they have never heard of Him.

 

[Ebionite]

Sorry, I don't understand why do you think he is referring to Psalm 51.

Paul was quoting the Septuagint.

God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.
Romans 3:4

Against thee, thee only, have I sinned, and done [this] evil in thy sight: that thou mightest be justified when thou speakest, [and] be clear when thou judgest.
Psalms 51:4

Against thee only have I sinned, and done evil before thee: that thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.
Psalms 50:4, LXX

 

[Eliana]

Interesting .. the NT did not exist in the time of Jesus, and he preached as a Rabbi in synagogues,
and was known as 'King of the Jews' in the Holy land where he resided.
..so what else could Jesus be, other than a Jew, believing in the God of Abraham?
..despite him contesting some of the exaggeration of the Sanhedrin at the time.


That's not the right attitude of a believer .. just caring about your own.

No... Christians call him king of the Jews, and even according to their own bible he was called this only to mock him. I never said I only care about my own, I said I don't care what the bible says because I'M NOT A CHRISTIAN. I also don't care what the Quran says because I'm not a muslim. There's no point in quoting them to me because I think they're as meaningful as the writings on the back of a cereal box.

 

[Eliana]

I believe there are many Jews who believe Jesus is the Messiah. Perhaps the problem is that Christianity is viewed as a competing religion rather than as a progression from Jewish belief.

There are no Jews who believe in Jesus. They are called Christians.

 

[Ebionite]

"Original sin" has been very controversial since how could a newborn have "original sin" if it's never made immoral choices? There's a lot of Christian commentary with plenty of disagreement on this.

It's official doctrine, regardless of the bad theology.

IX. Of Original or Birth-Sin.

Original sin standeth not in the following of Adam, (as the Pelagians do vainly talk but it is the fault and corruption of the Nature of every man, that naturally is engendered of the offspring of Adam; whereby man is very far gone from original righteousness, and is of his own nature inclined to evil, so that the flesh lusteth always contrary to the Spirit; and therefore in every person born into this world, it deserveth God's wrath and damnation. And this infection of nature doth remain, yea in them that are regenerated; whereby the lust of the flesh, called in Greek, φρονημα σαρκος, (which some do expound the wisdom, some sensuality, some the affection, some the desire, of the flesh), is not subject to the Law of God. And although there is no condemnation for them that believe and are baptized; yet the Apostle doth confess, that concupiscence and lust hath of itself the nature of sin.

Articles of Religion — Center for Reformation Anglicanism

www.anglicanism.info

Also the conflation of man with person and the the union of state and church leads to a loss of legal status re natural rights.

 

[Ebionite]

No... Christians call him king of the Jews, and even according to their own bible he was called this only to mock him.

Wrong, the Bible also describes the title being used in a positive sense:

Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem,
Saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews? for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship him.
Matthew 2:1-2

The star of Bethlehem relates to Balaam's vision.

I shall see him, but not now: I shall behold him, but not nigh: there shall come a Star out of Jacob, and a Sceptre shall rise out of Israel, and shall smite the corners of Moab, and destroy all the children of Sheth.
Numbers 24:17

 

[I Am Hugh]

Why didn't they include them? Why don't they match?

I've already addressed this. If my answer wasn't acceptable you will have to be more specific. Who didn't include exactly what and how did they not match. I'll need scriptural references. Exact references where they allegedly don't match. Given that I've already answered they don't have to include them or match with the example of Ezra 7:1-5 and 1 Chronicles 6:1-15.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Wrong, the Bible also describes the title being used in a positive sense:

Now when Jesus was born in Bethlehem of Judaea in the days of Herod the king, behold, there came wise men from the east to Jerusalem,
Saying, Where is he that is born King of the Jews? for we have seen his star in the east, and are come to worship him.
Matthew 2:1-2

The star of Bethlehem relates to Balaam's vision.

You mean Matthew repurposes a line from Numbers 24:16 (much as he repurposes Isaiah 7:14). Therefore?

Speaking of ...

A star Hebrew kokhav has been interpreted in four ways:​

1. It is understood as an image of a king, as in Isaiah 14:12, where the Babylonian king is called the morning star (see Ezek. 32:7). This would refer to the rise of King David.
2. Some understand it as the messianic king, identified by Rabbi Akiba as Bar Kokba ...
3. In ancient Near Eastern mythology, the gods Resheph, Nergal, and Apollo direct shooting stars or comets to destroy their enemies.
4. Kokhab (not meaning "star") can mean "host" (Arab kaukabun can mean "multitude of an army"): Thus, "a host shall march forth from Jacob."

[source]​

​

You are, of course, welcome to Matthew's spin -- whoever Matthew might be.

 

[Ebionite]

You mean Matthew repurposes a line from Numbers 24:16 (much as he repurposes Isaiah 7:14). Therefore?

No, Matthew doesn't refer to Balaam's vision or to the the astrological connection between the star and the king of the jews.

 

[muhammad_isa]

No... Christians call him king of the Jews..

..but the disciples of Jesus were not called Christians .. they were Jews who attended
a synagogue, and believed that Jesus was the Messiah.
I know you don't believe Jesus was sent by God .. nor John the Baptist .. but surely, you are
not saying that it's all made up .. are you?

It makes no sense to me that you believe in the God of Abraham, but believe that the two most
populous religions in the world are based on falsehood.

 

[Eliana]

..but the disciples of Jesus were not called Christians .. they were Jews who attended
a synagogue, and believed that Jesus was the Messiah.
I know you don't believe Jesus was sent by God .. nor John the Baptist .. but surely, you are
not saying that it's all made up .. are you?

Obviously they weren't called Christians since the term didn't exist. Technically they are Jewish apostates for rejecting halakha, and idolaters if they thought Jesus was G-d.

It makes no sense to me that you believe in the God of Abraham, but believe that the two most
populous religions in the world are based on falsehood.

Argumentum ad populum

G-d made it clear that the Torah was binding and eternal, he said the world would end before a single letter would be altered. HaShem said that he does not change his mind nor reverse himself. He stated his covenants are binding, eternal and unchangeable. No Jew will ever accept any theological position which postulates that the Torah has been changed in the slightest, because this contradicts the express stated words of G-d. Since religious groups (Christians and Muslims namely) claim otherwise, they are to be rejected regardless of who or how many believe it.

 

[LuisDantas]

It makes no sense to me that you believe in the God of Abraham, but believe that the two most
populous religions in the world are based on falsehood.

Considering that they pretty much exclude each other, we don't have the option of doubting that at least one of the two is indeed based on falsehood.

There is no obvious reason why at least one of the two must be true, either.

 

[YoursTrue]

Just reading the title of the thread. I was born Jewish. Family is Jewish, father, mother, cousins, etc. I knew from childhood that so-called Christians, including the Russians and Germans, killed the Jews during WW2 and before that. That is one reason why I did not think Christ was anything but some poor guy they hung up because he somehow did the wrong thing. I learned differently later on about Jesus and religion. I am glad I did.

 

[1213]

The word 'sin' is not in the Torah. The concept you're referring to is not vague if you read the Torah in Hebrew.

Is there scripture where it is said directly what sin means? If it is not directly said, it can be vague, because people can then make interpretations and get different meanings and disputes on what it truly means. But, that doesn't mean that some people could not have clear understanding, only that there can be different ideas and it may be difficult for some to find the correct meaning.

 

[1213]

Paul was quoting the Septuagint.

God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.
Romans 3:4

Against thee, thee only, have I sinned, and done [this] evil in thy sight: that thou mightest be justified when thou speakest, [and] be clear when thou judgest.
Psalms 51:4

Against thee only have I sinned, and done evil before thee: that thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.
Psalms 50:4, LXX

Thank you. Now I see the connection in that. But, I don't think it is misinterpreting in this case from Paul, because he doesn't say it means something else.