A Jewish Organization Explains It's View of Jesus

  • Thread starter Thread starter Jaypeeto3
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

Jaypeeto3

Guest
noahide.com/yeshu.htm

This is the site of the Lubavitch Jewish group explaining their view of Jesus Christ.

Anyone who thinks Judaism and Christianity can really be reconciled is daydreaming.

Love,
Jaypeeto3
 
Jaypeeto3 said:
noahide.com/yeshu.htm

This is the site of the Lubavitch Jewish group explaining their view of Jesus Christ.

Anyone who thinks Judaism and Christianity can really be reconciled is daydreaming.

Love,
Jaypeeto3
Click to expand...

This is just one opinion, coming from one Jewish group.

Hardly proof of the impossibility of reconciliation.
 
I seem to recall hearing some years ago about the Lubavitchers. I think they are regarded as a radical sect even among Jews.
Aren’t they the ones who believe their late founder, Rabbi Schneerson, to have been the Messiah?
 
Seem like the same hate-filled rhetoric we hear spewed from the mouths of so many various groups; “We’re right, you’re wrong—burn in hell!”
 
The Lubavitchers are considered radical because they believed Rabbi Schneerson to be the Messiah (they still expect him to rise from the dead, as they state on their website).

But their view of Jesus is no different than the rest of Judaism, really. And they insist they base it on the Talmud’s teachings about Jesus.

Love,
Jaypeeto3
 
Jaypeeto3 said:
myjewishlearning.com/ideas_belief/Jews_NonJews/NJ_Attitudes_TO/NJ_Christianity.htm

This Jewish article is much less inflammatory and more reasoned,
but the end result is clear: one CANNOT be Jewish and accept Jesus.

Jaypeeto3
Click to expand...

So? That was the argument of the Pharisees too, and modern Jews are theological descendants of the Pharisees. The Catholic Church, beginning with the Jewish disciples and Apostles, was always at odds with the Pharisees. Don’t be so confused as to think that the Pharisees represent the only continuation of Judaism today, even if they are the ones identified as Jews.

Obviously a Jewish Catholic isn’t going to uphold the sentiments of the Talmud as they regard Jesus, just as the Jews of Jesus time wouldn’t have upheld the teachings of the Talmud either (it hadn’t been written yet), and the Pharisees rejected the teachings of Jewish group of Jesus and His Apostles. Pharisiacal Jews have the Talmud, Christian Jews had/have the New Testament. Both groups claim to be the true continuation of Temple Judaism.

Now if you mean that a person can’t be a Catholic and an Orthodox Jew at the same time, I absolutely agree. They are opposed camps on the question of Jesus’ status as the Messiah at the very least. The mistake comes not from recognizing that obvious fact, but in dubiously defining Jewish to only mean Orthodox Jews. Let either side make its own reasoned convictions, but don’t simply concede something as fundamental as the Jewish identity without serious examination of its history and the theology of the Covenant of Abraham, Isaac, and Moses.

Peace and God bless!
 
Jaypeeto3 said:
myjewishlearning.com/ideas_belief/Jews_NonJews/NJ_Attitudes_TO/NJ_Christianity.htm

This Jewish article is much less inflammatory and more reasoned,
but the end result is clear: one CANNOT be Jewish and accept Jesus.

Jaypeeto3
Click to expand...

Let me see… Mary, Joseph, Peter, Andrew, … were they not Jews? Did they not accept Jesus? Edith Stein… St. Edith Stein.
And let us not forget the Lord Himself. He was Jewish, taught in the synagogues, observed the Passover- I believe He accepted Himself. I’m afraid I will have to disagree with you based on the numbers who are Jewish and accept Jesus, including Jesus.
🙂
 
I am, of course, not referring to Jewish people who accept Jesus.
Nor am I suggesting that Christians should not be nice and kind to Jewish people.

When I say that there can be no “reconciliation” between JudaISM and Christianity, I am referring to the RELIGIONS.
One side or the other will have to change it’s teachings.

God bless.
 
I have always been under the understanding that some Jews reguard Jesus as a Prophet.
 
This is a very complicated relgious situation. On the one hand, Technically, anybody who is born Jewish is Jewish, ethinically. In other words you can have Jewish atheist Buddhist Muslims and even Christians (Messianic Jews.) However the problem is arises when christians to perpetuate this notion that unless Jews repent and believe in Jesus as their Messiah than their relationship towards G-d is insufficient. Look at it this way. Sidhartha Guatma might be viewed as a sort of savior figure who came to abolish the caste system and animal sacrafice however compartively speaking who dont hear stories of Buddhist telling Hindus that they have to accept Buddha as some sort of Hindu Messiah.

I go to different relgious websites online 2 of which are Jewish. The first one iswww.jewsforjudaism.com which acts as a response team towards missionaries trying to convert jews and some of the tactics they utilize. It also has proof text were Jews who are well versed in the Tanak will refute christian arguments for Jesus being the Messiah. there is another website called www.messiahTruth.com which specializes in the same thing. Its important to remember that no 2 Jews are exactly alike. In other words some Jews might consider Jesus to be a great moral Teacher or Prophet, others might see him as a product of hellenstic myth.

it isnt completey impossible to reconcile the two relgions it just takes tolerance and disscussion.
 
This is a very complicated relgious situation. On the one hand, Technically, anybody who is born Jewish is Jewish, ethinically. In other words you can have Jewish atheist Buddhist Muslims and even Christians (Messianic Jews.) However the problem is arises when christians to perpetuate this notion that unless Jews repent and believe in Jesus as their Messiah than their relationship towards G-d is insufficient. Look at it this way. Sidhartha Guatma might be viewed as a sort of savior figure who came to abolish the caste system and animal sacrafice however compartively speaking who dont hear stories of Buddhist telling Hindus that they have to accept Buddha as some sort of Hindu Messiah.

I go to different relgious websites online 2 of which are Jewish. The first one iswww.jewsforjudaism.com which acts as a response team towards missionaries trying to convert jews and some of the tactics they utilize. It also has proof text were Jews who are well versed in the Tanak will refute christian arguments for Jesus being the Messiah. there is another website called www.messiahTruth.com which specializes in the same thing. Its important to remember that no 2 Jews are exactly alike. In other words some Jews might consider Jesus to be a great moral Teacher or Prophet, others might see him as a product of hellenstic myth.

it isnt completey impossible to reconcile the two relgions it just takes tolerance and disscussion. on behalf of both parties
 
40.png
Neilbass2:
I have always been under the understanding that some Jews reguard Jesus as a Prophet.
Click to expand...
No religious Jew regards Jesus as a prophet.
 
40.png
Sagefrakrobatik:
This is a very complicated relgious situation. On the one hand, Technically, anybody who is born Jewish is Jewish, ethinically. In other words you can have Jewish atheist Buddhist Muslims and even Christians (Messianic Jews.)
Click to expand...
“Messianic Jews” is usually a catch-all phrase for Jews who have converted to Evangelical Protestantism, or a form thereof. Some accept the divinity of Jesus, some don’t. Most Catholic converts from Judaism refer to themsleves as Jewish Catholics or as Hebrew Catholics/Christians.
 
“Messianic Jews” is usually a catch-all phrase for Jews who have converted to Evangelical Protestantism, or a form thereof. Some accept the divinity of Jesus, some don’t. Most Catholic converts from Judaism refer to themsleves as Jewish Catholics or as Hebrew Catholics/Christians.
Click to expand...
Indeed, don’t confuse the two groups! Their theology is in many ways more divergent from eachother than the gap between Christians and Jews in general.

The problem comes less, in my opinion, from the “ethnic” versus “religious” Jews, but rather over the very definition of Judaism. Judaism today is not Temple Judaism, not even close. This isn’t intended as a disparaging remark against modern Orthodox Jews, but just a statement of historical necessity and fact. In the Temple, indeed serving as High Priests, were Jews who would likely be more foreign to Modern Jews than Catholics are (the Sadducees). Christianity and Pharisiacal Judaism arguably share a LOT more in common than either due with Saduciacal Judaism, yet the Pharisees went to Saducee priests for Temple sacrifices. The Christians grew as their own sect within late Temple Judaism, and unlike the Sadducees they survived the destruction of the Temple along with the Pharisees.

The fact that Christianity, by theological, Messianic necessity, incorporated Gentiles is not un-Jewish. On the contrary, it’s precisely what the Messianic Age is supposed to involve. What’s more, even within Orthodox Judaism there are some that expect that, with the coming of the Messianic Era, many rituals (except Passover, more on that in a moment) would become obsolete, for lack of a better term. Again, in this the Catholic faith is not especially un-Jewish.

The interesting thing is that the one Jewish ritual that Catholics absolutely must participate in is the Passover Seder, which we do every Sunday instead of once a year.

If one takes the perspective that Modern Rabbinical Judaism is “the Jewish religion”, then of course Judaism and Catholicism are seperate and irreconcilable. If, however, one takes the perspective that Temple Judaism was indeed true, then one can accept that there are two surviving forms of it today, Apostalic Christianity (from the Christian Jews) and Rabbinical Judaism (from the Pharisees). This isn’t a matter of Christians trying to “co-opt” the Jewish identity, but a simple recognition of the fact that Christian Jews worshipped in the Temple alongside the Pharisees while holding differing views from them about the identity of the Messiah, just as the Pharisees worshipped alongside the Sadducees despite the latter’s rejection of the prophets, and indeed even the notion of a Messiah.

Regardless, the Catholic Church, unlike the “Messianic Jews”, does not make it a point to say “we are authentic Judaism”. The “identity war” is settled by God, not by us. For me it suffices to say that both Catholics and Modern Jews are survivors of Temple Judaism, a form of Judaism that is distinct and lost in time, but which both groups trace their theological lineage directly back to. Which one is “the correct branch” is another matter, one with the lines obviously drawn by one’s affiliation. 🙂

Peace and God bless!
 
It’s interesting what Jewish rabbis write about the relationship of gentiles to Judaism. They generally hold that all gentiles can be saved without converting formally to Judaism, but rather by merely faithfully observing the seven “Noahide” laws.
Of course, they appreciate it when a non-Jew converts to Judaism, but it’s not at all required.

Love,
Jaypeeto3
 
Welcome to our Jewish friends.🙂

We do have some of the same problems— dealing with religious prejudice, mixed marriages, and harrassment from various evangelical groups. To be fully grounded on one’s faith is the best answer.

👍
 
Jaypeeto3 said:
noahide.com/yeshu.htm

This is the site of the Lubavitch Jewish group explaining their view of Jesus Christ.
Click to expand...

I noticed that on the site noahide.com/yeshu.htm
They say that J.C. “used procedures that involved cutting his flesh — which is also explicitly banned in the Bible (Shabbos 104b).”
Now is this true or not, that the Lord Jesus Christ had a tattoo or a mark on him that involved cutting the flesh? For example:
“Revelation 19:11-16 says:
11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.
12 His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.
13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.
14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.
16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.”
Wouldn’t this be forbidden by Leviticus 19:28 to have a tattoo written on the thigh?
Or would this have been allowed?
 
40.png
tonyq:
I noticed that on the site noahide.com/yeshu.htm
They say that J.C. “used procedures that involved cutting his flesh — which is also explicitly banned in the Bible (Shabbos 104b).”
Now is this true or not, that the Lord Jesus Christ had a tattoo or a mark on him that involved cutting the flesh? For example:
“Revelation 19:11-16 says:
11 And I saw heaven opened, and behold a white horse; and he that sat upon him was called Faithful and True, and in righteousness he doth judge and make war.
12 His eyes were as a flame of fire, and on his head were many crowns; and he had a name written, that no man knew, but he himself.
13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.
14 And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean.
15 And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God.
16 And he hath on his vesture and on his thigh a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.”
Wouldn’t this be forbidden by Leviticus 19:28 to have a tattoo written on the thigh?
Or would this have been allowed?
Click to expand...

I think that passage, last verse included, is a Christian application & re-use of this:​

  • Psa 45:1 To the choirmaster: according to Lilies. A Maskil of the Sons of Korah; a love song. My heart overflows with a goodly theme; I address my verses to the king; my tongue is like the pen of a ready scribe.
  • Psa 45:2 You are the fairest of the sons of men; grace is poured upon your lips; therefore God has blessed you for ever.
  • Psa 45:3 Gird your sword upon your thigh, O mighty one, in your glory and majesty!
  • Psa 45:4 In your majesty ride forth victoriously for the cause of truth and to defend the right; let your right hand teach you dread deeds!
  • Psa 45:5 Your arrows are sharp in the heart of the king’s enemies; the peoples fall under you.
  • Psa 45:6 Your divine throne endures for ever and ever. Your royal scepter is a scepter of equity;
  • Psa 45:7 you love righteousness and hate wickedness. Therefore God, your God, has anointed you with the oil of gladness above your fellows;
  • Psa 45:8 your robes are all fragrant with myrrh and aloes and cassia. From ivory palaces stringed instruments make you glad;
  • Psa 45:9 daughters of kings are among your ladies of honor; at your right hand stands the queen in gold of Ophir.
  • etc.
IOW, the passage in Rev.19 gives us a glimpse of the Messianic King going forth to destroy his enemies. '##
 
Gottle of GeerIOW said:
Yes, but I was focussing in on:
16 And he hath on his vesture **and on his thigh ** a name written, KING OF KINGS, AND LORD OF LORDS.”
According to the Jewish site, such a thing would not be allowed, if it were a tattoo that involved a cutting of the flesh.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top