Who was Jesus Christ considered to be in Judaism?

[rcwitness]

I’m saying that we don’t know but it’s unlikely that any impact was significant.

Interesting statement…

 

[meltzerboy]

Now the problem with all this is that virtually all that is supposedly ‘known’ is what appears in the Christian scriptures, early Christian ‘commentary’ and general Christian guess work.

Not only that but the OP didn’t ask about ‘Jews’, the OP asked about ‘Judaism’.

About the views of the Jewish people about Jesus, other than Christian texts, we know very little and that’s, actually, highly significant - what I’ve called the ‘Silver Blaze’ effect, ‘the curious incident of the dog in the night’ in the Sherlock Holmes story (the guard dog not barking while a murder and horse theft takes place is the deciding clue).

According to the Christian scriptures, an itinerant rabbi is going around performing all sorts of wonders, some of them large-scale, and the rest of the population don’t notice?

Now a Christian might argue that the ‘authorities’ clamped down on the news - the problem with this is that our whole history is of a people who are not good at being told what to do, in fact we’re useless at it. In ancient times we were hopeless at toeing the line, in the century and a half after the Romans arrived, we died in our hundreds of thousands and got driven into exile rather than behave and for the last couple of thousand years we’ve been a captive audience for Christians and Muslims who’ve done a lot to try to tell us what to do and we’ve failed miserably.

So, were the Jewish people at the time obeying orders? Or did they think of Jesus as Messiah, great prophet, God? Did they think him as a nice, friendly ‘reform’ rabbi? Or did they think/do nothing because, basically, nothing happened?

The answer is that, outside Christian texts, we have no idea and that’s significant in itself.

As to ‘Judaism’, well it was going through an entirely different existential crisis.

Apart from the Christian books, do the writings concerning Jesus by the Jewish scholar and historian, Josephus, provide any clues to some of your questions?

 

[Kaninchen]

Apart from the Christian books, do the writings concerning Jesus by the Jewish scholar and historian, Josephus, provide any clues to some of your questions?

You’d have to be more specific here - in other words, you brought it up, you tell me.

What does Josephus (ignoring the obvious interpolations) have to tell us about what your average Jew in the street thought about Jesus? What does it have to tell us about what ‘Judaism’ thought about Jesus?

 

[meltzerboy]

You’d have to be more specific here - in other words, you brought it up, you tell me.

What does Josephus (ignoring the obvious interpolations) have to tell us about what your average Jew in the street thought about Jesus? What does it have to tell us about what ‘Judaism’ thought about Jesus?

Josephus wrote about his impressions of Jesus so I thought perhaps you would know whether he also observed and wrote about other Jews’ reactions toward Jesus at the time.

 

[HelenRose]

Soo…are you saying Jesus Christ had no impact at all on the Jews of his time?

He had an impact on the Jews who followed him but to the world at large, Jesus was little known. It was Twelve Jews and their followers who brought knowledge of Jesus to the world.

As for the Muslims: It is my understanding that Mohammad believed that Jesus was a prophet and the Mary was a virgin who bore Him. This is what Mohammad taught in the Quran. Mohammad taught that the teachings of Jesus had been corrupted and that Mohammad, himself, was the prophet to set things straight.

 

[Kaninchen]

Josephus wrote about his impressions of Jesus so I thought perhaps you would know whether he also observed and wrote about other Jews’ reactions toward Jesus at the time.

His ‘impressions of Jesus’? He wasn’t born during Jesus’ lifetime so that would have been a bit difficult.

Josephus tells us very little about Jesus - other than the fact he existed and had followers.

 

[meltzerboy]

His ‘impressions of Jesus’? He wasn’t born during Jesus’ lifetime so that would have been a bit difficult.

Josephus tells us very little about Jesus - other than the fact he existed and had followers.

I thought Josephus had said more about his (second-hand) impressions. Perhaps not.

 

[MartinJordan]

What makes you think that Jesus would be the main topic of conversation between a Muslim and a Jew?

What are your thoughts on this?

m.huffpost.com/us/entry/6373754

Excerpt:

“In Judaism, Miller noted, devotees typically do not “believe in” Jesus as the messiah but rather see him as historical figure who offered certain wise teachings that resonate for Jews. Miller added that Jews do feel utmost respect for “our Christian brothers and sisters” to whom Jesus’ divinity is a central teaching.”

MJ

 

[Kaninchen]

What are your thoughts on this?

Not a lot but certainly that it has nothing whatsoever to do with the subject raised in the OP.

 

[MartinJordan]

Not a lot but certainly that it has nothing whatsoever to do with the subject raised in the OP.

I was merely responding to the point you raised, that Jesus as "nothing ".

MJ

 

[StGerardMajella]

Who was Jesus Christ considered to be in Judaism?

I think we need to narrow down the question and be specific. Which branch of Judaism? What time frame - now, or thousands of years ago?

Today, Judaism has many different “denominations” if you will - from the many strands of “Orthodox” Jews, to Messianic, Reform, Conservative, Reconstructionism, and more.

Judaism has also evolved and changed over time, so a particular time period would be helpful.

Better yet, it might be helpful to narrow down a particular Jewish individual or group’s perspective on Christ, such as “What did Jewish Sage _________ have to say about Christ?”

Insofar as Christ is concerned, during his day, the New Testament informs us that Christ had many Jewish followers that believed He was the Messiah. There were also many Jewish leaders who considered Christ to be a blasphemous heretic.

A great book on this topic, incidentally, is the book called, “A Rabbi Talks to Jesus”, where author Jacob Neusner places himself in the time of Jesus and imagines an engagement of dialogue and personal consideration of Christ’s message at the time – as if Neusner were actually present in the time of Christ. Fascinating read. Pope Benedict responds to Jacob Neusner in his book, “Jesus of Nazareth”.

As to whether Christ was or was not the Messiah, one could go so far as to say that this is the core and central dividing line between Christianity and Judaism.

In our modern day, there are Jewish converts to the Catholic faith - Hebrew Catholics - primarily located in Israel who believe Christ is the Messiah. We also have large numbers of Messianic Jews in Israel who believe Christ was the Messiah.

Make no mistake - This is a divisive issue, even today. There are plenty of opinions from many different angles and perspectives.

Personally, I’ve always been a bit baffled by the claim that the Creator could not incarnate into human form. He’s the Creator, after all - All powerful, all mighty, all knowing. He can do whatever He pleases, even incarnate into human form if He so chooses. Who are we as weak, frail, ignorant human beings to question the Creator’s all powerful abilities? I personally find it a strange argument. I get the “God is One” concept - I get that. I just don’t quite get how an all powerful Creator can be restricted from doing whatever He chooses to do - including incarnating as Christ if He so chooses.

 

[Moses613]

What are your thoughts on this?

m.huffpost.com/us/entry/6373754

Excerpt:

“In Judaism, Miller noted, devotees typically do not “believe in” Jesus as the messiah but rather see him as historical figure who offered certain wise teachings that resonate for Jews. Miller added that Jews do feel utmost respect for “our Christian brothers and sisters” to whom Jesus’ divinity is a central teaching.”

MJ

Who is this Miller? He or she does not speak for me

 

[Moses613]

I was merely responding to the point you raised, that Jesus as "nothing ".

MJ

You won’t find many quotes from older rabbinical sources for that very reason. Because Jesus has absolutely no theological significance to Jews, there is no need to talk about him, interpret his actions or non actions, or generally have any opinion about him whatsoever. It is in that sense that he is a “nothing” in Judaism – we can discuss his reception by various Jews at the time, the effects his teachings had on the world and how that affected the Jews, and on and on, but when you’re discussing “Jesus from a Jewish perspective” there’s nothing to discuss. He was just a man. It doesn’t even matter if he was a heretic, not a heretic, good or bad. He was a man who died 2000 years ago, like any other man. He is of interest to history, but not to religion. I think that what Kaninchen’s getting at. To Christians living in a Christian world, I realize this may be very hard to understand. Jesus is central to your entire worldview and culture. It is amazing and practically inconceivable that there are entire, large communities of orthodox Jews in America, for example, who not only don’t believe in Jesus, but don’t even talk about him, think about him or relate to him in any way! We don’t sit in corners, out of the earshot of Christians, and as a pastime, slander Jesus! He simply is a non-entity and a non-issue for us. Unless you’re weird like me and you hang out in CAF! LOL. My reason is that I’m interested in Christian-Jewish relations, and to a minor extent, Christian theology, purely out of curiosity.

 

[Peter_J]

This. Although Muslims will have a real hard time with calling him Nothing.

The OP seemed pretty clear to me: “Who was Jesus Christ considered to be in Judaism?” (emphasis added)

 

[AbideWithMe]

He simply is a non-entity and a non-issue for us. Unless you’re weird like me and you hang out in CAF! LOL. My reason is that I’m interested in Christian-Jewish relations, and to a minor extent, Christian theology, purely out of curiosity.

You’re not alone in the weirdness: religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/04/05/jews-reclaim-jesus-as-one-of-their-own/

 

[AbideWithMe]

Personally, I’ve always been a bit baffled by the claim that the Creator could not incarnate into human form. He’s the Creator, after all - All powerful, all mighty, all knowing. He can do whatever He pleases, even incarnate into human form if He so chooses. Who are we as weak, frail, ignorant human beings to question the Creator’s all powerful abilities? I personally find it a strange argument. I get the “God is One” concept - I get that. I just don’t quite get how an all powerful Creator can be restricted from doing whatever He chooses to do - including incarnating as Christ if He so chooses.

This has puzzled me, too.

I’ve seen numerous Jewish Biblical expositions on how Jesus can’t be God because no man can ascend to godhood. Meanwhile, it seems such a easily discernable fact about Christianity that it teaches that God descended to become a man—the opposite direction of what I see rabbis argue against in their misperception of Christianity.

So I don’t know why a good Jew must believe that God is unable to humble Himself to take on our flesh and walk among us (if He so chooses, not that He owes us that) because I haven’t found an explanation from a rabbi who understands what Christians actually believe about kenosis.

 

[MartinJordan]

He is of interest to history, but not to religion. I think that what Kaninchen’s getting at. To Christians living in a Christian world, I realize this may be very hard to understand.

I find it hard to believe thinking of Jesus having nothing to do with religion (regardless of the way Jews think "nothing " of him *) , is quite a puzzle when Billions know “something” of Jesus.

Meanwhile, Jesus was a man 100%, as far as my Christian world is concerned.

MJ*

 

[Moses613]

This has puzzled me, too.

I’ve seen numerous Jewish Biblical expositions on how Jesus can’t be God because no man can ascend to godhood. Meanwhile, it seems such a easily discernable fact about Christianity that it teaches that God descended to become a man—the opposite direction of what I see rabbis argue against in their misperception of Christianity.

So I don’t know why a good Jew must believe that God is unable to humble Himself to take on our flesh and walk among us (if He so chooses, not that He owes us that) because I haven’t found an explanation from a rabbi who understands what Christians actually believe about kenosis.

Here is an explanation, I didn’t write it but I lightly edited it:

There are certain actions that cannot be done, not because they are impossible to do, but because they are not really actions at all.

For instance: Can G-d make a “nyzaquml”?

There is no such thing as a nyzaquml. But can G-d make it?

Of course not! There is no such thing.

But does this mean that G-d is limited because He cannot make a nyzaquml? Of course not! Since there is no such thing, the request to make one is nothing but a jumble of words without any meaning.

There are more such things. Can G-d make something that is “dangerous” but not a "peril”?

Here, too, the answer is no, He cannot. Danger without peril is just an oxymoronic combination of words which doesn’t actually express anything. The whole sentence is meaningless.

Can G-d be the only G-d but also have another G-d with Him?

Same thing. The whole concept is meaningless, and of course G-d cannot do that. In the same vein, He cannot make danger without peril.

To ask, Can G-d make other G-ds? is the same thing. “G-d” by definition means without boundaries, and so He can only be one. So what the question really means is:

Can G-d be G-d and yet not be G-d at the same time?

Nope. Of course not. But since being at once G-d and not G-d is conceptually meaningless, this is the same as asking if G-d can create danger that isn’t dangerous.

Or, to use another example, asking “Can G-d kill Himself”, is just playing with words, because G-d by definition is eternal. So what you are asking is, “Can G-d be eternal and not eternal at the same time?”

No, He can’t.

So the idea is not that G-d has one limit, which is that He cannot limit Himself. Rather, G-d can do anything. But it has to be anything, not something that has no meaning. Like a nyzaquml. Or an all-powerful weakling. Or a unique copy.

Or a stone too heavy for Him to lift.

The same goes for G-d having a body, or being man and god at the same time. G-d has no limits, whereas corporeality is a limitation. So the question you are asking is: can G-d be unlimited and limited at the same time? Same answer as above.

 

[SyroMalankara]

Here is an explanation, I didn’t write it but I lightly edited it:

The same goes for G-d having a body, or being man and god at the same time. G-d has no limits, whereas corporeality is a limitation. So the question you are asking is: can G-d be unlimited and limited at the same time? Same answer as above.

Isn’t God “choosing a people” a limitation then? Since the “no limit” God is then choosing a corporeal limit?

 

[meltzerboy]

I think we need to narrow down the question and be specific. Which branch of Judaism? What time frame - now, or thousands of years ago?

Today, Judaism has many different “denominations” if you will - from the many strands of “Orthodox” Jews, to Messianic, Reform, Conservative, Reconstructionism, and more.

Judaism has also evolved and changed over time, so a particular time period would be helpful.

Better yet, it might be helpful to narrow down a particular Jewish individual or group’s perspective on Christ, such as “What did Jewish Sage _________ have to say about Christ?”

Insofar as Christ is concerned, during his day, the New Testament informs us that Christ had many Jewish followers that believed He was the Messiah. There were also many Jewish leaders who considered Christ to be a blasphemous heretic.

A great book on this topic, incidentally, is the book called, “A Rabbi Talks to Jesus”, where author Jacob Neusner places himself in the time of Jesus and imagines an engagement of dialogue and personal consideration of Christ’s message at the time – as if Neusner were actually present in the time of Christ. Fascinating read. Pope Benedict responds to Jacob Neusner in his book, “Jesus of Nazareth”.

As to whether Christ was or was not the Messiah, one could go so far as to say that this is the core and central dividing line between Christianity and Judaism.

In our modern day, there are Jewish converts to the Catholic faith - Hebrew Catholics - primarily located in Israel who believe Christ is the Messiah. We also have large numbers of Messianic Jews in Israel who believe Christ was the Messiah.

Make no mistake - This is a divisive issue, even today. There are plenty of opinions from many different angles and perspectives.

Personally, I’ve always been a bit baffled by the claim that the Creator could not incarnate into human form. He’s the Creator, after all - All powerful, all mighty, all knowing. He can do whatever He pleases, even incarnate into human form if He so chooses. Who are we as weak, frail, ignorant human beings to question the Creator’s all powerful abilities? I personally find it a strange argument. I get the “God is One” concept - I get that. I just don’t quite get how an all powerful Creator can be restricted from doing whatever He chooses to do - including incarnating as Christ if He so chooses.

As I have previously noted, there are Jews today who do believe that Jesus is the Messiah but NOT divine: they call themselves Nazarene Jews. They are neither Hebrew Catholics nor Messianic Jews. The dividing line for them between Jews and Christians is not the Messiahship of Jesus but the divinity. Although they are a tiny minority of Jews, they do exist.

For most Jews, even an all-powerful G-d cannot become a human incarnation since such a process is tantamount to imperfection on the part of G-d, Who is perfect. It would be almost the same as saying that G-d can become an evil demon if He so chooses. G-d can only be G-d as an incorporeal spiritual entity. He cannot be human just as He cannot be demonic and cannot be pantheistic or merged with His creation. This is not considered a limitation in the ordinary sense.