Who was Jesus Christ considered to be in Judaism?

  • Thread starter Thread starter IGotQuestions
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
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.
This a better explanation than mine from the Jewish perspective. Thank you, Moses.
 
Isn’t God “choosing a people” a limitation then? Since the “no limit” God is then choosing a corporeal limit?
G-d is choosing a people, who themselves have limitations. This is not a limitation on the part of G-d since it is not He Who has limitations but they by their being human. If one believes that the choosing of a people is a limitation, one might also say that G-d’s Creation is a limitation since it is limited to a certain universe and earth and does not include others. There is also a hypothesis that Jews were not the original Chosen People, but they are instead a default chosen group since they were the only ones who accepted the Law from G-d as well as the responsibility to serve G-d as a priestly people who, by so doing, proclaim the existence of the One G-d to the other nations of the world.
 
G-d is choosing a people, who themselves have limitations. This is not a limitation on the part of G-d since it is not He Who has limitations but they by their being human. If one believes that the choosing of a people is a limitation, one might also say that G-d’s Creation is a limitation since it is limited to a certain universe and earth and does not include others.
Exactly. I don’t believe either are limitations, neither is the incarnation - how is any of these a limitation rather than a example or even an expansion.
There is also a hypothesis that Jews were not the original Chosen People, but they are instead a default chosen group since they were the only ones who accepted the Law from G-d as well as the responsibility to serve G-d as a priestly people who, by so doing, proclaim the existence of the One G-d to the other nations of the world.
Right, but if the incarnation is to be a limitation, isn’t God’s proclamation to others by a people also a limitation - reasoning under a similar criterion?
 
IGotQuestions

I would recommend a book called Why the Jews Rejected Jesus, by David Klinghoffer. Several of his arguments have stuck in my memory, even though it’s nearly ten years since I read his book.

For someone who is fully familiar with the New Testament and then starts reading the Old Testament, many passages in Isaiah and elsewhere will immediately strike the reader as resonating with the life, teachings, and death of Jesus. But it doesn’t work the other way around. For someone who is familiar with the Old Testament and only later starts to look at the New Testament, these apparent parallels are not apparent at all. On the contrary, the Jewish reader – for whom the OT is the whole of Scripture – will find what Klinghoffer calls a “mismatch” between the OT and the NT. The many differences will heavily outweigh the few similarities.

In addition, Klinghoffer quotes a whole string of reasons to cast doubt on Paul’s assertions about his personal background, namely his claim to be descended from the tribe of Benjamin, his claim to be a Pharisee, and his claim to have studied under Gamaliel. Very briefly, Klinghoffer says that by the Herodian period there were virtually no families left, apart from the Levites, who could confidently trace their ancestry back to the Twelve Tribes; it is highly improbable that there were any Pharisees normally resident anywhere outside Jerusalem and its immediate surroundings in Judea, let alone hundreds of miles away in Tarsus; and whenever Paul quotes from the Jewish scriptures, he shows that he is familiar with the Greek text, the Septuagint, rather than the original Hebrew, whereas Gamaliel and his students would have used the Hebrew text only. It is not wholly impossible that all three assertions are true, Klinghoffer concedes, but the odds are pretty heavily stacked against that.
 
Yours was nice and succinct as well, but thanks for the compliment. As I said, I copied it from somewhere.
Moses613—Just stopping in to say I saw your reply. Thanks. I hope to respond after my workday if I’m home.

Being that I’m an artist by profession, I have to return to drawing a nyzaquml, since it seems some people don’t know what they look like. 🤷😃
 
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.
…to which the Christian response would be that Christ was perfect, leading a sinless life, without blemish.
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.
Christ reflected no human limitations in the ordinary sense. He lived an entirely Divine, supernatural life.

How else do we as Christians explain the following, in no particular order?:

Christ’s miraculous birth to the Virgin Mary
Christ’s teaching in the Temple in Jerusalem as a young child
The Sermon on the Mount
His many miracles, including healing of the sick, the blind, and more
The Miracle at Cana
The Transfiguration
His Resurrection
The Descent of the Holy Ghost upon the Apostles
The Communion of Saints
Preaching of the Gospel to the Gentiles by Ss. Peter and Paul and others
Miracles associated with the institution of the Mass
The Sacraments of the Catholic Church

These are not the signs of an ordinary, human life, but a life of One filled with the Holy Ghost. The Word became flesh, and dwelt among us, as the Book of John states.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top