Zone1 Are any Christians here interested to know WHY Jews don’t believe Jesus was the Messiah?

[buttercup]

The Jews await return to the land, the rebuilding of the third temple and the messianic age (and all that entails).

I know this wasn't directed to me but I hope you don't mind me chiming in. I think one of the big problems in why the Jews rejected Jesus as the Messiah is because there is either disagreement or confusion that there are two advents of the Christ / Messiah. The Messianic prophecies (including the ones you mentioned) that the Jews claim were not fulfilled by Jesus are prophecies about the second coming of Christ, not the first. Which of course hasn't happened yet, we are awaiting those also.

I don't want to paint with a broad brush, because I don't know what all Jewish people believe... but it seems that at least some disagree that there are two distinct pictures of the Messiah: the Servant and the Sovereign... or in other words, Conquering King. (I think of it as the Lamb and the Lion.) As others mentioned, one of the main reasons why most Jews rejected Jesus is because they were expecting only the latter.

I think there's another big reason as well, but for now I'll stop here.

 

[irosie91]

I know this wasn't directed to me but I hope you don't mind me chiming in. I think one of the big problems in why the Jews rejected Jesus as the Messiah is because there is either disagreement or confusion that there are two advents of the Christ / Messiah. The Messianic prophecies (including the ones you mentioned) that the Jews claim were not fulfilled by Jesus are prophecies about the second coming of Christ, not the first. Which of course hasn't happened yet, we are awaiting those also.

I don't want to paint with a broad brush, because I don't know what all Jewish people believe... but it seems that at least some disagree that there are two distinct pictures of the Messiah: the Servant and the Sovereign... or in other words, Conquering King. (I think of it as the Lamb and the Lion.) As others mentioned, one of the main reasons why most Jews rejected Jesus is because they were expecting only the latter.

I think there's another big reason as well, but for now I'll stop here.

feel free to continue with the other "big reason" ----as a practical issue---what do you
think was the outcome ---FOR JEWS of the founding of the CHRISTIAN EMPIRE of Emperor
Constantine and his descendants?

 

[buttercup]

feel free to continue with the other "big reason" ----as a practical issue---what do you
think was the outcome ---FOR JEWS of the founding of the CHRISTIAN EMPIRE of Emperor
Constantine and his descendants?

I'll reply later, because I want to have the scriptures ready before I post it, and it would take a bit of time to compile them. Plus, I have some IRL stuff I gotta do right now.

 

[BS Filter]

Messiah means 'anointed one'. The Messiah Jews were expecting was a human ruler anointed by God to unite Israel and the Jews. Jesus said he was not this messiah. He said, however, he was anointed by God (a messiah) to proclaim the good news of the forgiveness of sins.

The Messiah comes twice. That's what many don't understand.

 

[irosie91]

The Messiah comes twice. That's what many don't understand.

Don't tell Vladimir POOOTIE-----he might drop dead of a heart attack. BTW---
where did the "twice" come from?

 

[rosends]

I know this wasn't directed to me but I hope you don't mind me chiming in. I think one of the big problems in why the Jews rejected Jesus as the Messiah is because there is either disagreement or confusion that there are two advents of the Christ / Messiah. The Messianic prophecies (including the ones you mentioned) that the Jews claim were not fulfilled by Jesus are prophecies about the second coming of Christ, not the first. Which of course hasn't happened yet, we are awaiting those also.

The problem I would have with this is that there is no concept of a second coming surrounding the Jewish messianic prophecies.

I don't want to paint with a broad brush, because I don't know what all Jewish people believe... but it seems that at least some disagree that there are two distinct pictures of the Messiah: the Servant and the Sovereign... or in other words, Conquering King. (I think of it as the Lamb and the Lion.) As others mentioned, one of the main reasons why most Jews rejected Jesus is because they were expecting only the latter.

I think there's another big reason as well, but for now I'll stop here.

While there is an idea/certain opinion that there are two messianic figures, the two follow one directly after the other so any gap is unacceptable.

 

[Batcat]

howabout - not historically correct ...

bat, if the jews did not believe the rendition of a&e written by moses - about original sin - or its entirety as best for the religious - - at what time was original sin made a subject of concern ... for someone to sacrifice their life for christians to be saved - as that must have been after jesus's time ...

- so who really died for your sins.

Keep in mind Jesus was trying to convince the Jewish people he was their messiah.

Jesus the Jew

BBC - The Passion - Articles - Jesus from a Jewish perspective

One of the certain facts about Jesus was that he was a Jew.

www.bbc.co.uk

***snip***


The belief that Jesus was God is an impossibility for Jewish thought. But not so the belief that Jesus claimed to be the Messiah. Several Jews have in the course of 2000 years, claimed to be the Messiah - sent by God to inaugurate God's kingdom on earth. Simon Bar Kochba in 132 CE and Shabbetai Zvi in 1665 CE are two examples among many. But the association of Messiah with terms like Son of Man and Son of God, which developed a profusion of meanings, soon led to exalted claims for Jesus that few Jews felt able to follow. Even within the New Testament this is so; by the time of the full-blown Trinitarianism of the 4th century creeds this gap was unbridgeably wide.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/thepassion/articles/jesus_the_jew.shtml.

The belief that Jesus was God is an impossibility for Jewish thought. But not so the belief that Jesus claimed to be the Messiah. Several Jews have in the course of 2000 years, claimed to be the Messiah - sent by God to inaugurate God's kingdom on earth. Simon Bar Kochba in 132 CE and Shabbetai Zvi in 1665 CE are two examples among many. But the association of Messiah with terms like Son of Man and Son of God, which developed a profusion of meanings, soon led to exalted claims for Jesus that few Jews felt able to follow. Even within the New Testament this is so; by the time of the full-blown Trinitarianism of the 4th century creeds this gap was unbridgeably wide.

Jesus was put to death by the Romans on the charge that he claimed to be the Messiah. Jesus made it clear to Peter that he regarded himself as the Messiah (Mark 8:29) as he did to the High Priest (Mark 14:62). Some Jews accepted Jesus as Messiah, believing that he would redeem them from the bitter yoke of Rome and bring the messianic age. When Jesus rode into Jerusalem he was acclaimed, "blessed is the Kingdom that comes, the kingdom of our father David" (Mark 11:10). Other Jews rejected the claim.

The charge against Jesus on the cross and his mockery as 'King of the Jews', his execution between two villains, the appearance of the royal messianic motifs - these all suggest that Pilate faced a man charged with sedition. Jesus was not crucified because he denied his Jewishness, abandoned the Scriptures, or disowned his people. He remained a Jew, Jesus of Nazareth, the Jew from Galilee and was executed for political rather than religious reasons.

To claim to be the Messiah, if it was an offence against Judaism at all, was certainly not (as the Gospels contend) an offence against Jewish law for which Jesus could have been put to death. The Gospels say that Jesus' claim to be the Messiah was blasphemy, but in Jewish law, blasphemy was to curse God using God's sacred name. Jesus did nothing of the sort. For Jews, history has shown that Jesus was not the long-awaited Messiah, for Jews were not delivered from the yoke of Roman bondage and the Golden Age did not come. However, some Jews have suggested that Jesus was following in the footsteps of the biblical prophets (cf. Mark 6:15, Matt 21:11).

 

[BS Filter]

Don't tell Vladimir POOOTIE-----he might drop dead of a heart attack. BTW---
where did the "twice" come from?

Scripture, old testament.

Two Messiahs in Judaism: Ben David and Ben Joseph - Jews for Jesus

An exploration of the two different descriptions of the Messiah brought up in the book of Zechariah, the Jewish understanding of Messiah ben Joseph and Messiah ben David, and that Jesus fulfills both descriptions.

jewsforjesus.org

 

[rosends]

Scripture, old testament.

Two Messiahs in Judaism: Ben David and Ben Joseph - Jews for Jesus

An exploration of the two different descriptions of the Messiah brought up in the book of Zechariah, the Jewish understanding of Messiah ben Joseph and Messiah ben David, and that Jesus fulfills both descriptions.

jewsforjesus.org

wow...that shows real ignorance about Judaism. Not only is there no direct scriptural evidence of two messiahs, the idea that there might be two is a rabbinic interpretation. But once you are relying on the rabbinic ideas then you should give credence to what the rabbis actually say (such as R. Saadia Gaon who explains that the appearance of the Ben Joseph figure is not a sure thing, or the rabbinic explanation that the two figures follow one immediately after the other so any gap of, say 2000+ years is not part of it). So are you actually saying that you subscribe to the rabbinic teachings now? Because they teach all sorts of things you might not like. Or do you just attach yourself to isolated rabbinic ideas if you happen to like them?

 

[AsherN]

wow...that shows real ignorance about Judaism. Not only is there no direct scriptural evidence of two messiahs, the idea that there might be two is a rabbinic interpretation. But once you are relying on the rabbinic ideas then you should give credence to what the rabbis actually say (such as R. Saadia Gaon who explains that the appearance of the Ben Joseph figure is not a sure thing, or the rabbinic explanation that the two figures follow one immediately after the other so any gap of, say 2000+ years is not part of it). So are you actually saying that you subscribe to the rabbinic teachings now? Because they teach all sorts of things you might not like. Or do you just attach yourself to isolated rabbinic ideas if you happen to like them?

Considering her "proof" was from a Christian site...

 

[BS Filter]

wow...that shows real ignorance about Judaism. Not only is there no direct scriptural evidence of two messiahs, the idea that there might be two is a rabbinic interpretation. But once you are relying on the rabbinic ideas then you should give credence to what the rabbis actually say (such as R. Saadia Gaon who explains that the appearance of the Ben Joseph figure is not a sure thing, or the rabbinic explanation that the two figures follow one immediately after the other so any gap of, say 2000+ years is not part of it). So are you actually saying that you subscribe to the rabbinic teachings now? Because they teach all sorts of things you might not like. Or do you just attach yourself to isolated rabbinic ideas if you happen to like them?

You don't get out much, do you. Here's another "ignorant" Rabbi for you.

Rabbi Schneider - A Jewish Believer in Jesus - Discovering The Jewish Jesus

In 1978, having no concept of or familiarity with Jesus, feeling isolated, unfulfilled, and lost, a young Jewish man was suddenly awakened from his sleep. Immediately, a vision appeared to him of Jesus on the cross. “I knew at that...Read More

discoveringthejewishjesus.com

 

[rosends]

You don't get out much, do you. Here's another "ignorant" Rabbi for you.

Rabbi Schneider - A Jewish Believer in Jesus - Discovering The Jewish Jesus

In 1978, having no concept of or familiarity with Jesus, feeling isolated, unfulfilled, and lost, a young Jewish man was suddenly awakened from his sleep. Immediately, a vision appeared to him of Jesus on the cross. “I knew at that...Read More

discoveringthejewishjesus.com

He's a Christian. He claims that at age 20, Jesus appeared to him and he accepted Jesus. That's fine and all, but no actual Jewish rabbinical school would accept and give ordination to a Christian so the "rabbi" title is a lie. Can you show me that he is actually a rabbi? I can post an image of my certificate or ordination. I can give you the name of my rosh kollel and the names of the rabbis on the beit din who gave me ordination. Strangely, I see none of that on his website.

Hmmmm...wonder why...

 

[Meriweather]

I'm curious, what is the chapter / verse for that statement by Jesus? I'm not disputing it, I just want to see what you were talking about. Thanks.

This covers an in depth study of all four Gospels, especially John's, and coincidentally even touches on some of what rosends and AsherN note.

Basically John notes that Jesus says that Moses referenced him, and there is at least one other place in the Gospels that mention Jesus pointing to the Moses prophecy. From what I gather from Moses, his prophecy had nothing to do with being a King of Israel, it had to do with being a prophet speaking words from God. In John, especially, Jesus insists his authority to speak and perform came directly from God. It was a study of all these verses.

Now part of the study that interested me was the mention of a human messiah (and there were many Old Testament messiahs and a divine messiah. In studying the Jewish faith, I have not seen anything thus far where Jews and the people in Jesus' time were expecting a Divine Messiah. I haven't been able to find whether this was something that came up in or after the time of Jesus, as Jesus did not fit what was expected of the next human messiah, but would relate better to Jesus. Jesus, himself, seemed to relate best with the Moses prophecy when he said that prophecy spoke of him.

Yesterday, rosends commented that from the Jewish standpoint, the Moses prophecy spoke of future prophets in general, not necessarily just one.

 

[buttercup]

The problem I would have with this is that there is no concept of a second coming surrounding the Jewish messianic prophecies.

While there is an idea/certain opinion that there are two messianic figures, the two follow one directly after the other so any gap is unacceptable.

Those two statements seem to be contradictory. First you said there's no concept of a second coming in regard to the Messiah... but then you said there is an idea that there are two Messianic figures, one directly after the other.

In your second statement, are you saying that there's an idea that there are two different individuals, in other words two entirely different Messiahs?

Just in case you misunderstood, I wasn't making the claim that there are two different Messiahs. There's one Messiah, but the Bible paints two distinct pictures of that same Messiah.... He is BOTH the suffering servant and the conquering King. I mean, we all know that God Himself is not one-dimensional, He is both powerful but also merciful, loving and gentle.

But my point was that there are two advents, and in the second advent, the Messiah will be the conquering King, whereas in the first he came in a humble way, serving, teaching, healing, etc.

So if you could please clarify your post that I'm quoting, I just want to make sure we're understanding each other.

Also, can you please back up your second statement biblically? What scriptural support do you have for the claim that the two Messiahs (or two different aspects of the same Messiah?) will come directly after the other?

 

[rosends]

Those two statements seem to be contradictory. First you said there's no concept of a second coming in regard to the Messiah... but then you said there is an idea that there are two Messianic figures, one directly after the other.

In your second statement, are you saying that there's an idea that there are two different individuals, in other words two entirely different Messiahs?

yes, according to certain understandings, there are 2 distinct messianic characters, no second coming of the first one, so the two statements aren't contradictory.

Just in case you misunderstood, I wasn't making the claim that there are two different Messiahs. There's one Messiah, but the Bible paints two distinct pictures of that same Messiah.... He is BOTH the suffering servant and the conquering King. I mean, we all know that God Himself is not one-dimensional, He is both powerful but also merciful, loving and gentle.

The problems with this according to Judaism are that the messiah is not the textual suffering servant, and that in Judaism, the conquering king is also supposed to be a spiritual paradigm who leads and rules by being righteous. So we don't actually NEED two different people to play 2 different roles.

Also, can you please back up your second statement biblically? What scriptural support do you have for the claim that the two Messiahs (or two different aspects of the same Messiah?) will come directly after the other?

there is no scriptural mention of the Messiah son of Joseph. It is a rabbinical idea. If you read through this site

https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/101747/jewish/Mashiach-ben-Yossef.htm

and look at the footnotes, you will see references to talmudic discussion, the Aramaic interpretation of certain passages and the tradition of supplementary stories called Midrash. If anyone wants to sign on to a belief in these citations, then one should be consistent and say that rabbinic understanding is authoritative in all situations, not just in ones that people like.

 

[buttercup]

This covers an in depth study of all four Gospels, especially John's, and coincidentally even touches on some of what rosends and AsherN note.

Basically John notes that Jesus says that Moses referenced him, and there is at least one other place in the Gospels that mention Jesus pointing to the Moses prophecy. From what I gather from Moses, his prophecy had nothing to do with being a King of Israel, it had to do with being a prophet speaking words from God. In John, especially, Jesus insists his authority to speak and perform came directly from God. It was a study of all these verses.

Now part of the study that interested me was the mention of a human messiah (and there were many Old Testament messiahs and a divine messiah. In studying the Jewish faith, I have not seen anything thus far where Jews and the people in Jesus' time were expecting a Divine Messiah. I haven't been able to find whether this was something that came up in or after the time of Jesus, as Jesus did not fit what was expected of the next human messiah, but would relate better to Jesus. Jesus, himself, seemed to relate best with the Moses prophecy when he said that prophecy spoke of him.

Yesterday, rosends commented that from the Jewish standpoint, the Moses prophecy spoke of future prophets in general, not necessarily just one.

Ok, but what I was specifically talking about was your statement, "Jesus said he was not this messiah".... If Jesus stated that directly, there must be a scripture, right? Again, I'm not disputing it, I just want to see it, and see the context.

To be clear, we agree (I think all of us here agree) that the Jewish people were expecting a different type of Messiah. From what I gather, they were expecting a conquering king.

So even if Jesus did say what you're claiming He said, what is your point? Because what matters is what the scriptures say, not what some people think it says.

 

[BS Filter]

He's a Christian. He claims that at age 20, Jesus appeared to him and he accepted Jesus. That's fine and all, but no actual Jewish rabbinical school would accept and give ordination to a Christian so the "rabbi" title is a lie. Can you show me that he is actually a rabbi? I can post an image of my certificate or ordination. I can give you the name of my rosh kollel and the names of the rabbis on the beit din who gave me ordination. Strangely, I see none of that on his website.

Hmmmm...wonder why...

Do the research. Not my job to educate stupid people.

 

[rosends]

Do the research. Not my job to educate stupid people.

I have done the research. That's how I know he's lying about being a rabbi. But you want to accept him hook, line and sinker, without thinking at all. I guess that's your preferred method...good luck with that.

 

[buttercup]

yes, according to certain understandings, there are 2 distinct messianic characters, no second coming of the first one, so the two statements aren't contradictory.

The problems with this according to Judaism are that the messiah is not the textual suffering servant, and that in Judaism, the conquering king is also supposed to be a spiritual paradigm who leads and rules by being righteous. So we don't actually NEED two different people to play 2 different roles.

Thanks for the clarification. So you're confirming my initial point that the Jewish people (generally speaking) believe that the scriptures portray the Messiah in one way, not the servant and the sovereign. That's why I said one of the biggest problems is that belief, because with all due respect, it's missing the full picture and it's what caused many Jewish people of that day to not see that Yeshua was/ is the Messiah.

there is no scriptural mention of the Messiah son of Joseph. It is a rabbinical idea. If you read through this site

https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/101747/jewish/Mashiach-ben-Yossef.htm

and look at the footnotes, you will see references to talmudic discussion, the Aramaic interpretation of certain passages and the tradition of supplementary stories called Midrash. If anyone wants to sign on to a belief in these citations, then one should be consistent and say that rabbinic understanding is authoritative in all situations, not just in ones that people like.

But in addition to the many Messianic prophecies describing a suffering servant that are rejected as prophecies of the Messiah by the Jews, there are also pictures or "types" of the Messiah, one of those being Joseph. He was hated, rejected, he suffered, he was a faithful servant, rejected by his own but he forgave them, etc.

There is ample scriptural support for that aspect of the Messiah, but if you reject the idea that the Messiah was portrayed in that way, then it's understandable that you wouldn't see any of that.

 

[rosends]

Thanks for the clarification. So you're confirming my initial point that the Jewish people (generally speaking) believe that the scriptures portray the Messiah in one way, not the servant and the sovereign. That's why I said one of the biggest problems is that belief, because with all due respect, it's missing the full picture and it's what caused many Jewish people of that day to not see that Yeshua was/ is the Messiah.

Or, Christians create a picture which is wrong by inserting a Jesus character into a Jewish discussion of the messiah and this is what causes them to think that Jews don't see Jesus.

But in addition to the many Messianic prophecies describing a suffering servant that are rejected as prophecies of the Messiah by the Jews, there are also pictures or "types" of the Messiah, one of those being Joseph. He was hated, rejected, he suffered, he was a faithful servant, rejected by his own but he forgave them, etc.

There is no concept of "types". There are people and there are figures and roles. That Joseph in Egypt went through many things doesn't have anything to do with a messianic role or figure. It seems that Christians try to find archetypes and shadows which simply aren't valid or useful.