Why don't Jews believe in Jesus?

[Valke2]

The clincher for me is the fact that the Apostles went out to tell the world about Jesus, while knowing they would be martyred.

That’s powerful conviction.

And thousands of Jews chose death over forced conversion.
And the great majority of Jews who heard Jesus did not think much of him. That is the clincher fror me.

 

[Valke2]

And is god “never allowed to change precedent if he revealed to the whole nation, he must reveal to the whole nation again”? because that’s “boxing God in” to your own expectations. He had reasons for doing what he did, and likely it was because he knew the Jewish people wern’t ready as a whole nation to accept their messiah(who wasn’t just going to be their messiah, but the messiah for the whole human race) and were going to oppose and hurt him for claiming to be the messiah, but then again that was the plan because that was going to be the act of salvation, the lamb’s blood to save them this time.

As I recall one of the reasons Jesus was crucified was because in the eyes of the Pharisees, he did openly claim he was the messiah(in that he said he was the King of the Jews and The Son of Man) and they therefore wanted him dead because they thought he really was dangerous. At least according to the only source we have on the issues at hand. To them at least it was clear that he claimed to be their Hero and to reign over the Jewish people.

No one gets crucified for claiming to be the Messiah. If that is what the NT says, I would have to say it is wrong. Maybe the Romans had him killed for that. Claiming to be the Messiahis not a punishable offense in Judaism.

 

[Kaninchen]

As I recall one of the reasons Jesus was crucified was because in the eyes of the Pharisees, he did openly claim he was the messiah(in that he said he was the King of the Jews and The Son of Man) and they therefore wanted him dead because they thought he really was dangerous. At least according to the only source we have on the issues at hand. To them at least it was clear that he claimed to be their Hero and to reign over the Jewish people.

Isn’t it curious that, in the ‘crowd and Pilate’ scene, the choice was the ‘son of the father’ (bar-abba) rather than the ‘son of man’ (Jesus)?

 

[Valke2]

Valke, I ask you to read Jeremiah 31 and then the book of Hebrews found in the New Testamant.

I"ve read Jeremiah. Never read teh book of Hebrews.
WHy?

 

[Valke2]

Jews my understanding do believe in Jesus as a prophet but not the Messiah that is my understanding, Jews do state in many of their historical documents of Jesus and what had occurred.

We don’t believe he was a prophet.

 

[colliric]

Isn’t it curious that, in the ‘crowd and Pilate’ scene, the choice was the ‘son of the father’ (bar-abba) rather than the ‘son of man’ (Jesus)?

Not really:
Jesus name does not mean “the son of man” or “king of the jews”

it means “God Saves”, He could have also been called Joshua in english but for the fact that his name Yeshu is a variation, or nickname, of the original aramaic for Joshua(Yehoshua), hence in Greek Jesu, and english Jesus.

So they saved “son of the father” but killed “God Saves”, that cancells each other out, hehehe…

 

[colliric]

We don’t believe he was a prophet.

No, but you do officially believe he existed(as your own historians say so) and was, before he went astray, “a very good rabbi”. You do believe he was a Jewish rabbi.

 

[Kaninchen]

Not really:
Jesus name does not mean “the son of man” or “king of the jews”

it means “God Saves”, He could have also been called Joshua in english but for the fact that his name Yeshu is a variation, or nickname, of the original aramaic for Joshua(Yehoshua), hence in Greek Jesu, and english Jesus.

So they saved “son of the father” but killed “God Saves”, that cancells each other out, hehehe…

I think you’ve rather missed the point.

 

[Kaninchen]

No, but you do officially believe he existed(as your own historians say so) and was, before he went astray, “a very good rabbi”. You do believe he was a Jewish rabbi.

What exactly do you mean by ‘officially’?

Could you cite these ‘very good rabbi’ and ‘going astray’ sources?

Or that we believe he was a Jewish rabbi (as opposed to Chinese?)?

Or that he existed?

In the NT he certainly sounds (a lot of the time) like an itinerant preacher in the Pharisee tradition but Jewish sources have nothing to say on the subject. If you’re implying that Josephus is a ‘witness’, I thought that even Christian scholars believed that it’s a pious fraud (interpolation).

 

[Kitty_Chan]

Ok. But there isn’t much he said that was not said before he came.

Of course He would not contridict His Father. He came to fullfill the Law, not abolish it.

Other than saying He is I Am, no one could complain about what He said in all of His teachings.

Also just what problem is there with Love your neighbour as yourself? Is there a problem with that? This is what I was speaking about, This is what Jesus preached.

people get bent out of shape with oh Jesus didnt do this or that, He existed or didnt, He was God or wasnt. What about just wondering about what He said? That gets washed under every time and lost in these conversations.

The refusal by people to discuss what Jesus said and instead discuss what He did or didnt do is amazing. If one just wants to call Him a overenthusatic rabbi, not even get to His divinity.

Just call Him a prophet, even the muslims allow Jesus that title at least. One things for sure He taught the things of God, and its undermined everytime. Tell me who delights in undermining things of God?

 

[Kaninchen]

The refusal by people to discuss what Jesus said and instead discuss what He did or didnt do is amazing. If one just wants to call Him a overenthusatic rabbi, not even get to His divinity.

Just call Him a prophet, even the muslims allow Jesus that title at least. One things for sure He taught the things of God, and its undermined everytime. Tell me who delights in undermining things of God?

Unless one is the kind of Jew who likes message boards, why would one want to spend any time talking about what Jesus said? We have more than enough sages to talk about, after all, and what Jesus said wasn’t exactly novel.

Why should we call him a prophet and not, say, Mohamed or Joseph Smith?

Why don’t Christians accept them as prophets if we’re supposed to accept Jesus as a prophet?

 

[Kitty_Chan]

Unless one is the kind of Jew who likes message boards, why would one want to spend any time talking about what Jesus said? We have more than enough sages to talk about, after all, and what Jesus said wasn’t exactly novel.

Why should we call him a prophet and not, say, Mohamed or Joseph Smith?

Why don’t Christians accept them as prophets if we’re supposed to accept Jesus as a prophet?

Please read back to previous posts to see what the discussion is about, before derailing the conversation further. Sorry to be blunt, but you are twisting what I am speaking about.

btw as for Mohamed or Joseph they ARE prophets in their religions.

 

[Kaninchen]

Please read back to previous posts to see what the discussion is about, before derailing the conversation further. Sorry to be blunt, but you are twisting what I am speaking about.

btw as for Mohamed or Joseph they ARE prophets in their religions.

Sorry to be blunt but please read the posts prior to your posts to see what they were about. In other words, after one poster talking about how Jews see Jesus and another questioning where the information came from, you turn up and say what you said (which could be interpreted as an attempt to derail that conversation).

 

[Kitty_Chan]

Sorry to be blunt but please read the posts prior to your posts to see what they were about. In other words, after one poster talking about how Jews see Jesus and another questioning where the information came from, you turn up and say what you said (which could be interpreted as an attempt to derail that conversation).

I could see that, I tried to avoid that by quoting Valke2 in my post, I guess it didnt work.

 

[Kaninchen]

I could see that, I tried to avoid that by quoting Valke2 in my post, I guess it didnt work.

Well, the thing is that people other than the one quoted read what we say and what you wrote seemed a very direct comment on the posts above.

 

[colliric]

What exactly do you mean by ‘officially’?

Could you cite these ‘very good rabbi’ and ‘going astray’ sources?

Or that we believe he was a Jewish rabbi (as opposed to Chinese?)?

Or that he existed?

In the NT he certainly sounds (a lot of the time) like an itinerant preacher in the Pharisee tradition but Jewish sources have nothing to say on the subject. If you’re implying that Josephus is a ‘witness’, I thought that even Christian scholars believed that it’s a pious fraud (interpolation).

The reason why the Hebrew for Jesus is Yeshu, is because of the 1st century “Midrash” which Jewish history scholars have always thought refers to Jesus when it talks about a person called Yeshu who was executed on the day of Passover, was from a place called “Notzri” had several followers one called “Mattai”, and was executed by the Jewish leaders of the time because he practiced “witchcraft and Magic”. This is why the official Jewish position is that Jesus existed, was probably a young Rabbi, and mislead the Christians into believing he was the messiah. Your faith recognizes from our own Gospels that he was a good teacher on some issues, only he was wrong when he claimed he was special.

 

[Kaninchen]

The reason why the Hebrew for Jesus is Yeshu, is because of the 1st century “Midrash” which Jewish history scholars have always thought refers to …

That’s very nice but could you provide any kind of citation?

 

[Valke2]

No, but you do officially believe he existed(as your own historians say so) and was, before he went astray, “a very good rabbi”. You do believe he was a Jewish rabbi.

It is not a universal jewish belief that Jesus was a rabbi or that he even existed. MOstly because that fact, while it has historical value, does not have theological value for us. However, some of our greatest rabbis have acknowledged that he existed. Some have stated that he was a teacher/rabbi. I think it is safe to say that there was a historical Jesus. But

 

[Valke2]

Of course He would not contridict His Father. He came to fullfill the Law, not abolish it.

Other than saying He is I Am, no one could complain about what He said in all of His teachings.

Also just what problem is there with Love your neighbour as yourself? Is there a problem with that? This is what I was speaking about, This is what Jesus preached.

There’s no problem with that. But we already had that commandment.

people get bent out of shape with oh Jesus didnt do this or that, He existed or didnt, He was God or wasnt. What about just wondering about what He said? That gets washed under every time and lost in these conversations.

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.

Just call Him a prophet, even the muslims allow Jesus that title at least. One things for sure He taught the things of God, and its undermined everytime. Tell me who delights in undermining things of God?

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.

 

[Valke2]

That’s very nice but could you provide any kind of citation?

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.