Why don't Jews believe in Jesus?

  • Thread starter Thread starter anon
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Valke2 said:
I think I discussed this in “Jesus in the Talmud thread”

There are references to what many believe is Jesus inthe Talmud. They were redacted at one time out of fear of christian violence and are included in some editions today as a kind of footnote.
Click to expand...
I have read about/around these over the years but it’s all really rather nebulous, isn’t it?

Nothing as strong as the ‘dog in the night’ evidence of a society where, supposedly, wondrous things were happening except hardly any Jews (the NT characters who only exist in the NT, of course) or Romans around at the time seem to have noticed.
 
Kaninchen said:
I have read about/around these over the years but it’s all really rather nebulous, isn’t it?

Nothing as strong as the ‘dog in the night’ evidence of a society where, supposedly, wondrous things were happening except hardly any Jews (the NT characters who only exist in the NT, of course) or Romans around at the time seem to have noticed.
Click to expand...
NOthing definitive. One reason being that they may have either: a. purposely changed certain facts in order to keep Christians from accusing them of criticizing Jesus; or b. As Jesus was not really an important character for Jews, they just weren’t paying close attention to the details.

But I do believe Rambam discusses Jesus, and he, at least, spoke as if Jesus existed. I don’t know of any jewish sources that confirm the miracles christians believe he did.
 
Valke2 said:
NOthing definitive. One reason being that they may have either: a. purposely changed certain facts in order to keep Christians from accusing them of criticizing Jesus; or b. As Jesus was not really an important character for Jews, they just weren’t paying close attention to the details.
Click to expand...
‘a’ would not an explanation for the lack of contemporary Roman observation though and the problem with the ‘we didn’t say anything because we didn’t want to upset Christians’ idea is we’re into the world of ‘purposefully hidden truths’ of the Da Vinci Code.
But I do believe Rambam discusses Jesus, and he, at least, spoke as if Jesus existed. I don’t know of any jewish sources that confirm the miracles christians believe he did.
Click to expand...
They weren’t exactly contemporaries! Rambam discussing Jesus is little different from us discussing Jesus (from the point of view of ‘acknowledging’ him in any way).
 
Kaninchen said:
‘a’ would not an explanation for the lack of contemporary Roman observation though and the problem with the ‘we didn’t say anything because we didn’t want to upset Christians’ idea is we’re into the world of ‘purposefully hidden truths’ of the Da Vinci Code.

They weren’t exactly contemporaries! Rambam discussing Jesus is little different from us discussing Jesus (from the point of view of ‘acknowledging’ him in any way).
Click to expand...
But we know that the Talmud was indeed edited at one time in order to avoid angering Christians. Whether or not one believes that the references edited out were about the actual Jesus. Christian monarchs had Talmuds burned and prohibited their use because they felt it was teaching bad things about Jesus. So, while it may be a bit like Divinci Code, the difference is that this was real.

Rambam is certainly not an eyewitness. I’m only saying that there have been jewish scholars who have assumed Jesus was a real person.
 
Valke2 said:
But we know that the Talmud was indeed edited at one time in order to avoid angering Christians. Whether or not one believes that the references edited out were about the actual Jesus. Christian monarchs had Talmuds burned and prohibited their use because they felt it was teaching bad things about Jesus. So, while it may be a bit like Divinci Code, the difference is that this was real.
Click to expand...
Oh, I’m sure that everybody involved was pretty careful about any references to anybody who might be construed to be the ‘Christian Savior’ (just as the Christian texts themselves are, evidently, ‘constructed’ rather than straightforward accounts - not just the Gospel of John, there are interpolations in the others, apparently, to keep them ‘on message’). The trouble is that there’s not much that can be deduced from that one way or the other.
Rambam is certainly not an eyewitness. I’m only saying that there have been jewish scholars who have assumed Jesus was a real person.
Click to expand...
I’ve always thought that in the more ‘jewish’ parts (where he sounds rather like just another argumentative Pharisee), the idea that there was a real person beneath the Christian gloss is rather convincing.
 
Saying you’re God does nothing. But acting as God, that speaks more than all the works:
Ez 37:12-13
Click to expand...
Thus says the Lord GOD:
O my people, I will open your graves
and have you rise from them,
and bring you back to the land of Israel.
Then you shall know that I am the LORD,
when I open your graves and have you rise from them,
O my people!
Click to expand...
That’s what we’re looking for.
Jn 11:21-25
Click to expand...
Martha said to Jesus,
“Lord, if you had been here,
my brother would not have died.
But even now I know that whatever you ask of God,
God will give you.”
Jesus said to her,
“Your brother will rise.”
Martha said to him,
“I know he will rise,
in the resurrection on the last day.”
Jesus told her,
“I am the resurrection and the life;
Click to expand...
and later in the same story
Jn 11:40-46
Jesus said, “Take away the stone.” Martha, the dead man’s sister, said to him, “Lord, by now there will be a stench; he has been dead for four days.”
Jesus said to her, “Did I not tell you that if you believe you will see the glory of God?”
So they took away the stone. And Jesus raised his eyes and said, “Father, I thank you for hearing me.
I know that you always hear me; but because of the crowd here I have said this, that they may believe that you sent me.”
And when he had said this, he cried out in a loud voice, 9 “Lazarus, come out!”
The dead man came out, tied hand and foot with burial bands, and his face was wrapped in a cloth. So Jesus said to them, “Untie him and let him go.”
Now many of the Jews who had come to Mary and seen what he had done began to believe in him.
Click to expand...
In the ancient world, acting as God would have much more significance that saying ‘I’m God, who are you?’
 
Others had “raised the dead” before and after Jesus. That is not the kind of miracle we were looking for. Eziekal’s reference is not to the resurrection of a single person and doing so did not fullfill it.
 
Valke2 said:
There’s no problem with that. But we already had that commandment.

As I said earlier, most of what he said was already part of Jewish theology. I’m sure you know the “love thy neighbor” teaching is found in Lev. 19:18, 19:34.

From a Jewish perspective, he is not a prophet. If you really are more concerned with discussing his words, then you should be happy to know that much of his ethics/teachings came from the Torah.
Click to expand...
Valke Im not sure what your point is. Ive commented on Jesus saying He came to fullfill the Law not abolish it.

It would stand to reason what you said above is true, of course Jesus taught from the Torah, if He taught from the Quran it would be a different deal 🙂

So … I guess were agreeing or Im missing something. 🙂
 
Valke2 said:
But we know that the Talmud was indeed edited at one time in order to avoid angering Christians. Whether or not one believes that the references edited out were about the actual Jesus. Christian monarchs had Talmuds burned and prohibited their use because they felt it was teaching bad things about Jesus. So, while it may be a bit like Divinci Code, the difference is that this was real.

Rambam is certainly not an eyewitness. I’m only saying that there have been jewish scholars who have assumed Jesus was a real person.
Click to expand...
To me the evidence for this is simple, the 2 Josephus refereneces to Jesus existed before the Medievil tampering with them. Josephus’s claim to have been at the execution of St James is not false, he did claim to have been there, only the wording was tampered with in the first reference to Jesus(the one which talks about him directly) which cast doubt on the Very jewish sounding second reference which goes “James, brother of Jesus, who was called the Christ”, note the “Was called” indicates Josephus did not actually believe he was who he was called.

These Jewish Scholars assumed jesus was a real person because of them and also the “Jesus in the Talmud” controversy.
 
First I would like to say Jews and Catholic do have a common denominator we have a Jewish Mother for us Catholics it’s Mary.

How do Jews refute their own Tora and the Prophets that are theirs and ours I just do not know. Maybe one out there may want to explain that to me.

Is there an area in the Old Testament that Christ does not fullfill per the prophets?

Even if one was to deny some of the prophets prophecies and Jesus the chances are trillions to one that these prophercies were completed.

for one the crucufication several hundred years before it’s inception

Jesus birthplace

Being from the house of David

Coming into Jerusleum on a mule.

Have Jews relied on animal sacrafices since his crucification?

Have there been any Jewish Prophets since Jesus’s birth?

Did the menora remain lit in the Temple in Jerusuleum since his crucification? prior to the year-- ??? when the Temple was destroyed.

These are just a few of hundreds

Catholics come from the Jews and as such we have the old and new Testaments to follow and believe in both closely.
Jesus came to provide a way to salavation and not to replace the old law.

In our Mass we have at least 1 reading from the old testament.

Jews are our brothers that have not taken the lantern from under the bed and placed on the night stand.
 
ALl I can tell you is that Jews and Christians read the scriptures very differently. If I never spoke to a christian, I could study Torah and Talmud and prophets and psalms 8 hours a day, 7 days a week, and in my entire lifetime it would never occur to me that anything I’ve studied has anything to do with Jesus. Just as you cannot understand how I can miss the hundreds of references to Jesus that are so obvious to you.

There are a number of arguments that should be considered when trying to answer the question of this post. Roughly speaking, they can be grouped in the following categories:
  1. Jews that lived before Jesus appeared.
  2. Jews (the few) who heard Jesus speak.
  3. The difference between Jews and the early Christians.
  4. The period of time from after Jesus and before Constantine
  5. The great debates in Medieval times.
  6. Modern disputations (debates)
Perhaps we should discuss each of these categories in greater detail or even seperate threads. But to sum up my personal take on the matter, had we not rejected Jesus, Christianity would most likely have remained a small sect within Judaism, Europe would never have been united under the Church, and the West would most likely have fallen to Islam. Christanity is in a very real sense fruit borne from the tree of life, a/k/a Torah. ANd I look forward to greater understanding and appreciation between and of the two faiths.
 
Valke2 said:
But to sum up my personal take on the matter, had we not rejected Jesus, Christianity would most likely have remained a small sect within Judaism, Europe would never have been united under the Church, and the West would most likely have fallen to Islam. Christanity is in a very real sense fruit borne from the tree of life, a/k/a Torah. ANd I look forward to greater understanding and appreciation between and of the two faiths.
Click to expand...
Well for what its worth I like what you said, I agree there is alot to learn. From my studies everytime one looks at what happened in the OT I understand God better.
 
But the question here is we do not read scripture differently. the old testament is the old testament. The prophets said what they said. I read what you read.

Are Jews still awaiting the Messiah or am I missing something?

What does the Torah and the old testament tell us when, the signs of who, and where He comes from?

What is to dispute in the Torah, old testament, and Prophets that is in dispute.

Why are the historical facts made with what if’s

“If we did not reject Jesus”.

Tell me what would make you a believer if Jesus fulfilled all the prophet’s prophecies and the circumstances of what had occurred after his crucification.

truth does not = what if’s

To deny the Messiah is to deny scripture.
 
c659smith said:
Are Jews still awaiting the Messiah or am I missing something?
Click to expand...
I think you must have missed all the previous threads where it’s been discussed and all the various citations and references.

Yes, you can (and obviously Christians do) find Jesus in the Tanakh. To Jewish eyes, however, such a process involves quite extraordinary reading and interpretation of texts.

I fear that you will find great futility in an attempt to ‘prove’ Jesus to us.
 
My question to you is

What must God do to prove to you of the arrival of any Messiah from Him to you?
 
Surely he has borne our griefs and carried our sorrows, yet we esteemed him stricken, smitten by God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our’ iniquities; upon him was the chastisement that made us whole, and with his stripes we are healed" (Is. 53:3-5).

Did the prophets not speak of a Messiah, a Mashiach, who would be rejected and despised by men? Not only Isaiah, but the writer of the Hallel (Psalms 113–118), sung every Passover by Jewish people to this day and by Jesus and his disciples in the Upper Room: "The stone which the builders rejected has become the head of the corner.

I can see at the time of Jesus where misinterpetation of the old Testament was figured, but when things that were and have come to pass have occurred is to deny truth.

Reading the old testament and the Tora gives me chills on how precise the Prophets were.
 
The NT reveals what was spoken of in the OT. If you do not accept the NT, the basis for your understanding would be different. Much of what Jesus did was complete the revelation of the OT. We cannot arrive at an understanding of God without His revelation. We cannot understand God simply on the OT. That is what revelation is: showing something that cannot be arrived at by reasoning.

What many Jews would need to believe in Jesus as God Incarnate would be the gift of faith from the Holy Spirit.

In the first century, many Jews were given this gift and worshiped both in the Synogog on the Sabbath and with the Community of believers on the Lord’s Day. This continued into the 3nd century when, finally, the Jewish Christians kind of died off. Their decendents lost their Jewish roots, and remained in Israel (the Church) as revealed by God.

So Israel divided into two parts: Jews and Christians. We both believe we are the decendents of Abraham, Isaac, and Moses. The Jews would claim more of a physical descent, whereas Christians would restrict the claim to spritual via baptism as the brother of Jesus (a Jew)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top