• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

How can a Jew reject Jesus as the Messiah?

Ehav4Ever

Well-Known Member
No, we don't have to read the whole Tanakh, nor do we have to read the
whole of Job. This man made one comment about the Messiah as our
Redeemer and it would be nice if you give the Hebrew interpretation of
that. Alternatively, do you have a problem with the Interlinear?

Yes, I had a feeling like you would not want to go through the text in Hebrew from start to finish. To answer your question, as I have said before, it is the Hebrew text only and no translations. So yes, I don't accept interlinears because they are translations.

Thus, add this to the list of why Jews don't accept Christian claims about Jesus or the NT.
 

robocop (actually)

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
I just think it is dangerous to start questioning the accuracy of the Bible, if you can't believe some of it, you can't believe any of it. We knew that "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness." The bible is self-affirming, and I think that anyone taking a diligent, honest look at it will be able to see that it is consistent throughout without needing any other texts to understand it. It all points to the messiah.
What translation of the Bible do you believe wasn't perfect?

I believe the King James Version is best, and it's the only version I know that is available for free in print. I believe the Torah and Greek New Testament are much better.

But I believe it has been modified. It talks about it in the Book of Mormon. Things were intentionally changed to create stumbling blocks.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
Yes, I had a feeling like you would not want to go through the text in Hebrew from start to finish. To answer your question, as I have said before, it is the Hebrew text only and no translations. So yes, I don't accept interlinears because they are translations.

Thus, add this to the list of why Jews don't accept Christian claims about Jesus or the NT.

What makes Christian translations less accurate? You could say that anyone is biased.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
I believe the King James Version is best, and it's the only version I know that is available for free in print. I believe the Torah and Greek New Testament are much better.

But I believe it has been modified. It talks about it in the Book of Mormon. Things were intentionally changed to create stumbling blocks.

Some people don't agree witht he NIV because of the Greek translations. The New International Version Exposed!
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
Theological bias, ignorance of cultural and historical context, replacement theology.

Yes, you could say anyone is biased, but when it comes to truth about untestable spiritual entities, you cannot claim empirical truth.

You could say that anyone has a theological bias. Messianic Jews don't believe in replacement theology.

That you cannot claim empirical truth means that Jesus could be the Messiah.
 

Tumah

Veteran Member
I know what anthropomorphism means, and I can see why/how one might link the clan with the place, or house, but this should not lead one to disassociate the people from the place. The one who comes forth (even from the stem of Jesse) is coming forth not just from the people, but from the place. Had this not been the case, Bethlehem would not have been mentioned in the prophecy. Micah, like Isaiah, could have prophesied the coming of the ruler of Israel as coming from Jesse, without mention of Bethlehem [Isaiah 11:1].

Micah 5:1 [JPS Edition 1985]
'And you, O Bethlehem of Ephrath,
Least among the clans of Judah,
From you one shall come forth
To rule Israel for Me-
One whose origin is from of old,
From ancient times.'
You can ask that about every time the prophet anthropomorphizes a place. Like in the previous passage where Zion is anthropomorphized instead of just saying Israel.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
Yes, I had a feeling like you would not want to go through the text in Hebrew from start to finish. To answer your question, as I have said before, it is the Hebrew text only and no translations. So yes, I don't accept interlinears because they are translations.

Thus, add this to the list of why Jews don't accept Christian claims about Jesus or the NT.

I think one of the reasons Jews don't accept Christian claims about Jesus and the New Testament is because Jewish people who follow Jesus are ostracized from their family and community. And another reason, unfortunately, is the barrier put up by anti-Semetism in the past. I think Christians are generally oblivious to the history of anti-Semetism and Christianity. They often are-for good reason: they haven't seen it, and it isn't in their hearts. With almost no exception, the Christians I've met have a special attachment to Jewish people and Israel. So the history of anti-Semetism is very much unknown for that positive reason-but there's also a bad reason. Many Christians today, especially evangelicals, don't have a sense of history. They'll quote Martin Luther left and right, but they won't talk about the horrific things he wrote that Adolph Hitler adopted, like his 1543 tractate Concerning the Jews and Their Lies, where he recommended, among other things, that synagogues be burned, Jewish homes destroyed, and rabbis forbidden to teach under threat of death. They'll quote the powerful preaching of John Chrysostom a thousand years before Luther, but they won't mention his seven sermon against the Jews, where he said, 'I hate the Jews,' called them possessed by the devil,' and said that the Jewish religion is 'a disease.'
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
Why does the previous passage mention Zion?

Bethlehem being referred to as Zion is not self contradictory. What is Zion? What is Mount Zion? What is the biblical meaning of Zion? | GotQuestions.org

The word Zion occurs over 150 times in the Bible. It essentially means “fortification” and has the idea of being “raised up” as a “monument.” Zion is described both as the city of David and the city of God. As the Bible progresses, the word Zion expands in scope and takes on an additional, spiritual meaning.

The first mention of Zion in the Bible is 2 Samuel 5:7: “David captured the fortress of Zion—which is the City of David.” Zion was originally an ancient Jebusite fortress in the city of Jerusalem. After David’s conquest of the fortress, Jerusalem became a possession of Israel. The royal palace was built there, and Zion/Jerusalem became the seat of power in Israel’s kingdom..

When Solomon built the temple in Jerusalem, the meaning of Zion expanded further to include the temple area (Psalm 2:6; 48:2, 11–12; 132:13). This is the meaning found in the prophecy of Jeremiah 31:6, “Come, let us go up to Zion, to the LORD our God.” In the Old Testament Zionis used as a name for the city of Jerusalem (Isaiah 40:9), the land of Judah (Jeremiah 31:12), and the nation of Israel as a whole (Zechariah 9:13).

The word Zion is also used in a theological or spiritual sense in Scripture. In the Old Testament Zion refers figuratively to Israel as the people of God (Isaiah 60:14). In the New Testament, Zion refers to God’s spiritual kingdom. We have not come to Mount Sinai, says the apostle, but “to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem” (Hebrews 12:22). Peter, quoting Isaiah 28:16, refers to Christ as the Cornerstone of Zion: “See, I lay a stone in Zion, a chosen and precious cornerstone, and the one who trusts in him will never be put to shame” (1 Peter 2:6).

Mount Zion as a geographical area is currently the center of much dispute. The Bible is clear that, one day, Zion will be the sole possession of the Lord Jesus, and Zion—the nation and the city—will be restored. “Awake, awake, / Clothe yourself in your strength, O Zion; / Clothe yourself in your beautiful garments, / O Jerusalem, the holy city; / For the uncircumcised and the unclean / Will no longer come into you” (Isaiah 52:1). And “the children of your oppressors will come bowing before you; / all who despise you will bow down at your feet / and will call you the City of the LORD, / Zion of the Holy One of Israel” (Isaiah 60:14).
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
Because something cannot be disproved is no evidence of truth. Prove that Thor is not the god of thunder, EMPIRCALLY.

The original translation of the Bible didn't have any more of a theological bias than the beliefs of the Jewish people has a theological basis. The pre NIV BIble refers to Jesus as God. The New International Version Exposed!

The title Lord identifies Jesus as God Incarnate!
This title is repeatedly omitted in the NIV. This is an inexcusable error. It dare not be overlooked or excused as an irrelevance, because that title Lord identifies Jesus as God!

  • Matt.13: 51: Jesus saith unto them, Have ye understood all these things? They say unto him, Yea, Lord.
  • Mark 9: 24: And straightway the father of the child cried out, and said with tears, Lord, I believe; help thou mine unbelief.
  • Mark 11:10 Blessed be the kingdom of our father David, that cometh in the name of the Lord: Hosanna in the highest.
  • Luke 9: 57: And it came to pass, that, as they went in the way, a certain man said unto him, Lord, I will follow thee whithersoever thou goest.
  • Luke 22: 31: And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat.
  • Luke 23: 42: And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom.
  • Rom.6: 11: Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord.
  • 1 Cor.15: 47: The first man is of the earth, earthy: the second man is the Lord from heaven.
  • 2 Cor.4: 10: Always bearing about in the body the dying of the Lord Jesus, that the life also of Jesus might be made manifest in our body.
  • Gal.6: 17: From henceforth let no man trouble me: for I bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus.
  • Col.1: 2: To the saints and faithful brethren in Christ which are at Colosse: Grace be unto you, and peace, from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.
  • 1 Tim.1: 1: Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the commandment of God our Saviour, and Lord Jesus Christ, which is our hope.
  • 1 Tim.5: 21: I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels, that thou observe these things without preferring one before another, doing nothing by partiality.
  • 2 Tim.4: 1: I charge thee therefore before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, who shall judge the quick and the dead at his appearing and his kingdom.
  • Titus 1: 4: To Titus, mine own son after the common faith: Grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour.
  • 2 John 1: 3: Grace be with you, mercy, and peace, from God the Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of the Father, in truth and love.
  • John 6: 69: And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God.
    Comment: This vital verse which identifies Jesus as the 'Messiah,' the 'Christ,' the 'Son of the living God' has been changed in the NIV to read: the 'holy one of God;' a term which could apply to any prophet or godly person. Pause dear reader and try to take in what that means.
 

Redemptionsong

Well-Known Member
You can ask that about every time the prophet anthropomorphizes a place. Like in the previous passage where Zion is anthropomorphized instead of just saying Israel.

You accept, I believe, that king David was a 'type' of Christ, or Messiah. Isn't this why the prophet Ezekiel is able to say, 'David my servant shall be king over them; and they shall have one shepherd' [Ezekiel 37:24]?

David, whom you accept as being of the root of Jesse, was, like his father, born in Bethlehem. Why, then, do you think that your future Messiah will be born elsewhere?

It all seems very odd to me that you expect a Messiah to come from the line of David, yet you reject the prophecies, and precise details, that tell you who to expect. Instead, you say that you'll know him by the peace he brings to earth.

Does this mean that your Messiah will come to Israel and automatically be recognised as the Redeemer? Does he combine a religious and political role? And are you satisfied that the Messiah will recognise you as a friend?
 

Ehav4Ever

Well-Known Member
What makes Christian translations less accurate? You could say that anyone is biased.

If you remember, I said that ALL translations are unacceptable even Jewish ones. We don't use translations as authoratitive. Jewish translation in English only exist where Torah learning was/is not so strong. Yet, most Jews know the translation does not overtake the original. So, what makes the Christian translation less accurate. 1st, the fact that it is is claimed to be a translation and 2nd the fact that it was made by people who did not/do not hold by Torath Mosheh.

You are right everyone could be biased. Thus, we Jews have a requirement, from Hashem, to always go for what was given at Mount Sinai and to go through the Jewiish transmission process - both of these are found in Hebrew.
 
Top