Do Jews acknowledge that Jesus did call Himself by the same divine name revealed to Moses?

[Kaninchen]

Or Christianity is Judaism, but with the Christ (Messiah) in it!

Both formulas are equally wrong, of course.

If Jesus was just a man, it would be as you said. But if he is risen from the dead and is seated at the right hand of the Almighty, then his Messiahship is not over, and He has all the time in the world to achieve what remains to be achieved, hasn’t he?

From a Christian point of view, that would be the case, from a Jewish point of view, it’s discussing Harry Potter again!

Moreover, I thought there was a teaching among the Jews stating that the whole Jewish people is suppose to do the works of the Messiah. Should we say that you have failed as the chosen People of God? Despite the appearances, I tend to believe the answer to this question is no.

I’m not being hostile here - just challenging - but just why would you think that it mattered to a Jew whether Christians viewed us as having succeeded or failed? It’s about as relevant as whether Mormons consider Catholicism as having succeeded or failed.

 

[Lapell]

Well, maybe my blinders are due to the fact that when God wanted to let us know He was God, He did so. We didn’t have to interpret word games. Job doesn’t need to puzzle out if the diety who speaks to him claims to be God. Neither does Abraham or Moses. Or Noah. Or the people of Israel. God makes it crystal clear who He is in Judaism.

I am also not familar with the context in which Jesus says only God is good.

Then why did you even intervene on those verses?

 

[Valke2]

Then why did you even intervene on those verses?

Because you posted the verse and asked what it could mean. A plain reading of the verse shows that Jesus did not consider himself God.

If you are going to start with the presumption that Jesus is God, then you need to find another way to interpet the verse, obviously.

 

[Lapell]

Both formulas are equally wrong, of course.
From a Christian point of view, that would be the case, from a Jewish point of view, it’s discussing Harry Potter again!
I’m not being hostile here - just challenging - but just why would you think that it mattered to a Jew whether Christians viewed us as having succeeded or failed? It’s about as relevant as whether Mormons consider Catholicism as having succeeded or failed.

Are the Harry Potter books sacred books? Discussing a novel and discussing on issues involving sacred books are quite very different things!

 

[Lapell]

Because you posted the verse and asked what it could mean. A plain reading of the verse shows that Jesus did not consider himself God.

If you are going to start with the presumption that Jesus is God, then you need to find another way to interpet the verse, obviously.

Like I said, you limited yourself to one possible interpretation. I acknowledge this possibility, but I also say that this is not the only one. And I thought Jews would exhaust the possibilities before they would make any pronouncement at all, so again, you disappoint me!

 

[Kaninchen]

Are the Harry Potter books sacred books? Discussing a novel and discussing on issues involving sacred books are quite very different things!

It goes back to earlier in the thread - my response to being asked to comment on specific quotes.

Basically, the Christian texts are ‘sacred books’ to Christians. If you’re not a Christian, however, then discussing them, or discussing aspects of their contents is no more than discussing literature and literary devices.

 

[Lapell]

I’m not being hostile here - just challenging - but just why would you think that it mattered to a Jew whether Christians viewed us as having succeeded or failed? It’s about as relevant as whether Mormons consider Catholicism as having succeeded or failed.

Well, I am not a Mormon, I can’t answer for them. But it’s relevant whether you succeed or fail as the chosen people of God, for the simple reason that God chose you and that His choices are without repentance. So says Paul in his letter to the Romans: “Did God reject the Jews? Far from it!!”

 

[Lapell]

It goes back to earlier in the thread - my response to being asked to comment on specific quotes.

Basically, the Christian texts are ‘sacred books’ to Christians. If you’re not a Christian, however, then discussing them, or discussing aspects of their contents is no more than discussing literature and literary devices.

However, among our sacred books is the whole of the Tanach!

 

[inJESUS]

That has a rather familiar theme to it - the idea that, somehow, Judaism is Christianity minus Christ because we’re waiting for a different one. The concepts of both ‘Messiah’ and what ‘Messiah’ is supposed to do are so hugely different - reflecting the fact that the two religions don’t ‘work’ in similar ways at all.

From a Jewish perspective, not only didn’t Jesus do what Messiah was supposed to do but what Christians say Christ did is completely irrelevant to the Jewish concept of Messiah.

 

[FaithofAbraham]

1. But there is no evidence that Jesus was saying that He was the new Melchizedek.
2. How could Jesus have existed before Abraham if He was purely a man?
3. Hebrews says that Jesus is like Melchizedek, not the new Melchizedek.

Melchi/KING Tzedek/RIGHTEOUS

Righteous King of Salem who is also a priest. Old one in Abraham’s time, new one with Jesus.

Jesus as Messiah is the High Priest Melchizedek now.

Hebrews 6:20 Whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus, made an high priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.

Jesus never said he existed before Abraham, he was referring to the Melchizedek that was before Abraham, saying as Messiah now he is it.

 

[Kaninchen]

Well, I am not a Mormon, I can’t answer for them. But it’s relevant whether you succeed or fail as the chosen people of God, for the simple reason that God chose you and that His choices are without repentance. So says Paul in his letter to the Romans: “Did God reject the Jews? Far from it!!”

Honestly, this is all just ‘Harry Potter’ (or ‘Shakespeare’ or whoever) to me, Lapell. It might be interesting as literature (I’ve always loved that “glass darkly” from Corinthians, for example) but beyond that of no significance whatsoever.

 

[Kaninchen]

However, among our sacred books is the whole of the Tanach!

Totally misread!

 

[FaithofAbraham]

I don’t think you are right with your logic.

You need to remember that the Catholic Church teaches that each of the divine Persons of the Trinity are fully God and that they each fully possess the nature of God.

Now, this means that Jesus could actually call His Father “God”, without neccessarily saying that He (Jesus) wasnt God as well. After all, all three Persons can be called “God”.

Well it doesn’t make sense for Jesus to say “He (God) talked from the burning bush” if Jesus was actually the one talking from it. You have Jesus referring to Father God in the third person as I AM talking from the bush, but you also want to make Jesus the I AM talking. So it doesn’t quite fit.

 

[Kaninchen]

the apostles themselves, like you, have had different interpretations and they questionned things based on their own understanding of who the Messiah will be and what He will do…even His death was a shock and disappointment to many of them…so it is not Christians who changed a “Jewish” concept, but the Jews themselves who followed Jesus re-interpreted and explained the same scriptures correctly (of course from Jesus’ point of view)…their interpretation is surely wrong according to you, but they were people who witnessed not only the miracles Jesus did, but Jesus’ crucifixion and resurrection…and we do believe these people who chose to die for what they witnessed instead on relying on humans’ interpretations because not 2 people will agree on all things, but none of them could deny what they saw with their own eyes…Jesus went even to the point of death to prove who He is…

We’re back to the problem with the OP and my reply to it.

We might as well be in a High School lit class talking about what Shakespeare may or may not have been saying in one of the sonnets. Of some literary interest but, beyond that, nothing.

 

[FaithofAbraham]

Okay, say you are right. How come then Jesus doesnt clarify this point when the Jews take up stones against Him?

They wanted to kill him anyway before all this, like they did all the prophets.

John 8:37 I know that ye are Abraham’s seed; but ye seek to kill me, because my word hath no place in you.

 

[inJESUS]

Well, maybe my blinders are due to the fact that when God wanted to let us know He was God, He did so. We didn’t have to interpret word games. Job doesn’t need to puzzle out if the diety who speaks to him claims to be God. Neither does Abraham or Moses. Or Noah. Or the people of Israel. God makes it crystal clear who He is in Judaism.

I am also not familar with the context in which Jesus says only God is good.

the point being made is rather simple…surely Jesus was not saying He is not good…cuz He said it elsewhere He is the good shepheard…and when you read the rest of the paragraph , the message is clear : if you want perfection, follow Jesus…you do not follow someone who is not good…

So Jesus says at the beginning: only God is good
and then He says at the end:

follow me for I am Good…

 

[FaithofAbraham]

Now, FaithofAbraham, what you have to do is prove that :

1-these writers had absolutly no idea what they were talking about, even less the OT.

2- all of them were preys to " textual coincidences"

You mash everything together as usual. God could say “I save all things” and if some guy saved a cat from a tree, by your reasoning you’d say “SEE THAT GUY IS GOD SINCE GOD SAID HE SAVES ALL THINGS!” We’ve done that all before.

 

[AgnosTheist]

Well, maybe my blinders are due to the fact that when God wanted to let us know He was God, He did so. We didn’t have to interpret word games. Job doesn’t need to puzzle out if the diety who speaks to him claims to be God. Neither does Abraham or Moses. Or Noah. Or the people of Israel. God makes it crystal clear who He is in Judaism.

GOOD ONE!

 

[FaithofAbraham]

And that Jews don’t use someone who is dead as a mediator for anything.

We don’t believe Jesus is dead.

And Jews use the Western Wall as a mediator by praying to it and putting their prayers in it.

Maybe Jesus would work better.

 

[AgnosTheist]

Because you posted the verse and asked what it could mean. A plain reading of the verse shows that Jesus did not consider himself God.

If you are going to start with the presumption that Jesus is God, then you need to find another way to interpet the verse, obviously.

I agree. Even when I was a devouted Christian everytime i get to read that verse, my inner voice of logic screams out “JESUS IS SAYING HE IS NOT GOD!!!”