Was Jesus the Messiah? CRISIS

  • Thread starter Thread starter flatliner
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
F

flatliner

Guest
I of course know that Jesus was the messiah. But a Jewish friend (well, he was a freind) gave this article to me. I’m not sure I no where to begin a defence. What do people make of it?
koshertorah.com/Yeshu%20HaNotzri.pdf

It seems like there is some slight of hand or deception or confusion, but I can’t quiet put my finger on it. PLEASE HELP!
 
I wouldn’t be too upset with your friend; yes he/she still can be your friend. By definition Jews don’t accept Jesus as the Messiah, if they did they would be Christians. Unfortunately, Jewish people have been forced to identify themselves by what they are not, namely Christian. This is not where they are truly coming from. We understand our Jewish roots, and we must also respect those roots. Feel fortunate that you have a friend that feels comfortable to share his beliefs with you, understand where your friend is coming from, and pray for him.
 
Thanks for the response. I will still be friends with him, and as you might have gathered from my post “are catholics the only true jews: poll,” i do understand my jewish roots. At least i thought i did. This article seems to say that given what is said in the torah, jesus could not have been the messiah given what He did in the NT. I understand Jesus to be the fullfillment of the law – he fulfills the hand washing, for instance, by making all things clean, not by always washing his hands. But this article seems to imply that the messiah would have or will lived or live exactly according to mosaic law – and that doing so would be the fulfillment. I wonder how he would stand out from an ordinary jew if this were the case, but, i dunno, maybe i’m getting confused. I need to be able to get over this hurdle with some reason and logic – i know it’s there, i just need to figure where the article is going wrong. Please help. I am having difficulty. I am praying for him all the while, but I think it would help a lot if i had something to say about this. Peace.
 
Your friend is probably sincere, but nonetheless he is flat out wrong. He is making the exact same mistake that the Jews in Jesus’ time made, because he doesn’t understand that Jesus fulfilled the old law. The passages he quotes show Jesus explaining himself and the old law and being God himself, he knows perfectly what the old law was about. Everything in the old testament was preparing us for the new testament. Unfornutately, your friend’s arguments are weak and they are the same as the Pharisee’s which Jesus very easily defeats with his infinite wisdom.
 
Is this just a website that your friend pointed you to, or did your friend compose these words and ideas?

The entire first page is nothing more than a rant and self-victimization, saying that we Christians believe Judaism to be evil.

Whoever wrote that should get real…

Or, as Sinead O’Connor once said, “Fight the real enemy!” (And that isn’t Christianity!)

Pax Christi. <><
 
Panis Angelicas:
Is this just a website that your friend pointed you to, or did your friend compose these words and ideas?

The entire first page is nothing more than a rant and self-victimization, saying that we Christians believe Judaism to be evil.

Whoever wrote that should get real…

Or, as Sinead O’Connor once said, “Fight the real enemy!” (And that isn’t Christianity!)

Pax Christi. <><
Click to expand...
LOL, yeah, that first page is pretty silly. But pointing that out doesn’t discredit the whoe thing.
 
40.png
flatliner:
I wonder how he would stand out from an ordinary jew if this were the case, but, i dunno, maybe i’m getting confused. I need to be able to get over this hurdle with some reason and logic – i know it’s there, i just need to figure where the article is going wrong. Please help. I am having difficulty. I am praying for him all the while, but I think it would help a lot if i had something to say about this. Peace.
Click to expand...
I think before the reason and logic you have to start with faith- as that is precisely where the article seems to go wrong. The author is writing about someone he believes to be a man, we believe he is God and man. When Jesus *appears *to contradict Mosaic Law, we might easily say that as God, his interpretation of the Law is quite superior to that of the Pharisees. When he tells the Apostles to do and observe all that the Pharisees say, that does not mean that He, as the Christ, is bound by their human judgement, nor that He is restricted from freeing the Apostles and others from the strictest, currently-enforced interpretation of the Law at a later time. Keep in mind, at this point, the Lord knows that His time has not yet come, i.e. he has not yet fulfilled the Law.

I am certainly no theologian and can only hope that what I have written above is in-line with Church teaching. I am sure that many, many more and better arguments can be made against the article, which itself often seems to take things out of context. This is just my initial reaction to it as a simple believing Catholic.
 
great responses so far everyone. I wonder if perhaps someone wouldn’t be willing to show how exactly one of the arguments in the article is flawed. They do seem to take things out of context and misunderstand things. But how exactly do they? I know this is tough, that is why I need help. The last poster gave an interesting intepretation about how the law was then currently being enforced. What, if anything, do people think about that?
 
There is great historical evidence that Jesus appeared to many people after his death on the cross. How can a mere man do that? Or for that matter, how could he raise people from the dead, cast out demons, etc. I realize that the individual who wrote the article will undoubtedly respond that we have no concrete proof that Jesus did all these things. As one earlier poster said, we are approaching this from a faith point of view. The writer of the article is already hardened against the truth. Anyone can take scripture and use it in a wrong way…even Satan did that when he tempted Jesus. This seems to be a case for much and prolonged prayer…that the Holy Spirit will soften your friend’s heart and that
they will be able to see beyond the old law. God bless you…I’ll be praying for you. :gopray:

Mary
 
Thank you mary. I think everyone is right here about the faith issue. the thing is, my friend was once a Catholic and he has left because of these arguments. I have to be able to show exactly how they are confused or else he won’t listen. Pointing to a difference in faith will just bring the discussion to a halt. This is so frustrating. :banghead:
 
You may want to post this in the “Ask an Apologist” forum when you have the opportunity. I think I read something about this recently on Catholic Answers, but they can find and and post the link for you and it may help.

The Pharisees were pretty much the law of the Jewish religion, and what they said, went. The author of the article you posted was claiming that Jesus had not taught his disciples well; but remember that Jesus came and did away with much of the “law” such as dietary laws, giving greater understanding to the rest on the Sabbath day.

For example, the Pharisees, working from the law of Moses, stated that to even strike a match to start a fire was illicit in the eyes of God. They were not allowed to heal; their hypocracy was in following the absolute letter of the law, forgetting mercy.

Which is worse: breaking the Sabbath as a man lies bleeding to death in front of you as the result of, say a runaway oxen having gored him as he stood unwittingly in its path? Or is it worse to just simply let the man lie there, giving the lame excuse that to help him, stop the bleeding, and possibly save his life would break the Sabbath?

What room in there is there for mercy? How is that one person going to move on and be able to glorify God if he was left to lie dying in the name of God?

Jesus revealed this hypocracy and brought us all mercy…he demonstrated the errors in the law and called the Pharisees on it and very deliberately broke the laws in order to make his points.

Remember, when Jesus died, the veil in the temple between it and the “holy of holies” was rent, symbolizing that salvation was open to all, not just the Chosen People.

We are to respect the Jewish people, study the law, and the history, and understand that we are Jewish as well…but we have accepted Christ. The Jews also are seperated bretheren, and when the time comes, God will remove the scales from their eyes.

It has been written, so it will be.
 
Here’s another thought, though it comes from the New Testament, which your friend has rejected, but for what it’s worth…

In Matthew 12:22, Jesus had just cast out a demon that was causing a young boy to be deaf and blind. The Pharisees accuse him of casting out demons by the power of Beelzebub.

Now here’s the key phrase from Matthew 12:25: “But he knew what they were thinking.”

Jesus doesn’t reply to the pharisees out of anti-semitism or hatred. He knows what’s in their hearts because He is God. The Pharisees hate Jesus precisely because he is claiming to be God, and that upsets their hold (in their minds) on the power structure prevalent at the time. The whole point of Jesus’ rejection of the Pharisees, as the Gospel account progresses, is to introduce a new covenant, as was so well expressed in earlier posts.

I hope everyone on this thread will make it a point to pray for you and your friend!
:) Mary
 
Jc: Your post was very enlightening. I hadn’t thought of approching the issue in such a way. I can anticipate him saying that the pharisees were not in error though and that the torah commands them to break the sabbath in certain circumstances. And that the breaking of the sabbath by the disciples was not one of them – even though it had to with their salvation. I have also tried to explain the eating of bread, that it wasn’t bread, it was God, and that to demand this be purified is say that God could not undergo transubstantiation without becoming impure. But he just claims that such thinking relies on our belief that Jesus was the messiah and as such just begs the question.
Maresiedotes: Thank you for your comments. I think you have a good thought there with the casting out of demons and how mathew describes it. But, as you say, it relies on the new testement which of course, he now rejects.
This seems to put us at impass. Our only discussion of what Jesus actually did comes from the new testament. If there was a way to show just from the torah what the messiah would do such that it could be mapped into the stories in the NT in a satisfactory way – well, i guess if that were easy, there wouldn’t be any jews left who deny their lord. I guess people are right that all I can do is pray for my friend. It just makes me so sad that I can’t make him understand. Well, thank you to all who posted. If people think of anything else, please don’t hesitate to post it. Peace.
 
The writer of that website tells us to think of Jesus without any preconceived ideas…That’s pretty impossible for someone who’s been educated all her life in the Church He founded 2,000 years ago! 😉
But I do receive a daily e-newsletter containing the day’s Scripture readings from the Mass, with commentary.
Here is today’s, in part.
Hope it helps a bit to understand where Jesus was coming from in those days:
** “The Son of Man”: this is one of the expressions used in the Old**
Testament to refer to the Messiah. It appeared first in Daniel 7:14
and was used in Jewish writings in the time of Jesus. Until our Lord
began to preach it had not been understood in all its depth. The title
"the Son of man" did not fit in very well with Jewish hopes of an
earthly Messiah; this was why it was Jesus’ favorite way of indicating
that He was the Messiah–thereby avoiding any tendency to encourage
Jewish nationalism. In the prophecy of Daniel just mentioned this
messianic title has a transcendental meaning; by using it Jesus was
able discreetly to proclaim that He was the Messiah and yet avoid
people interpreting His role in a political sense. After the
Resurrection the Apostles at last realized that “Son of Man” meant
nothing less than “Son of God”.
 
Was Jesus the Messiah? Of course he was.

This is nothing more than a Jewish version of a Jack Chick tract. The author gives himself away (1)when he can’t write out Jesus’ name. I know that not writing God’s name is forbidden under Jewish tradition but since the author doesn’t recognize Jesus as God, what’s the problem? and (2) when he makes the statement "As Yeshu *allegedly * said ‘and you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free’ ". Allegedly? We know that Jesus existed historically, whether or not one accepts him as messiah, so why does he *allege * what He says?

This has the same flavor of anti-Christian rhetoric that we heard prior to the release of “The Passion of the Christ”. Instead of accusing Christians of being “terrorists”, he should look at who is attacking Israel and who is her strongest defender.
 
Yes - absolutely - He was, is and always will be. The fact that some folks don’t believe this or misunderstand it, won’t change anything at all except the level of belief of the person who won’t accept it and of course, their personal salvation. I could put it this way - suppose I truely believed that the sun wouldn’t come up tomorrow. Does my erroneous belief have any effect on the sun rising or not? Do you think it will? When it does come up will I see the sunrise? Denial ain’t a river in Egypt! Pray for your friend. The fact that he is even grappling with the question means something is going on beneath the surface. :rolleyes:

Peace and all good,

Thomas2
 
Author, Lee Stroebel, non-catholic, yet writer of some very interesting things. In his book, THE CASE FOR FAITH, he summarizes his other book, THE CASE FOR CHRIST. The quote is as follows:
Code: 
" Hundreds of years before Jesus was born, prophets foretold the coming of the Messiah, or the Anointed One, who would redeem God's people.  In effect, dozens of these Old Testament prophecies created a fingerprint that only the true Messias would fit.  This gave Israel a way to rule out imposters and validate the credentials of the authentic Messiah.  Against astronomical odds --one chance in a trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion, trillion --
Jesus, and only Jesus throughout history, matched this prophetic fingerprint. This confirms Jesus’ identity to an incredible degree of certainty. The expert I interviewd on this topic, Louis, Lapides, is an example of someone raised in a conservative Jewish home and who came to believe Jesus is the Messiah after a systematic study of the prophecies. Today, he’s the pastor of a church in California and former preseident of a national network of fifteen messianic congregations. "
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top