• 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?

Harel13

Am Yisrael Chai
Staff member
Premium Member
Pardon my ignorance, but does this "unbroken chain of tradition" theory state that the Tanakh always existed - through the fall of Jerusalem and the exile? If so, what supportive writing is there for this? It would seem hard to imagine that the Babylonians would have left the texts untouched or allowed Yahudah to reproduce them in captivity. But possible I suppose.
To you it may be theory, but not to us. Let me attempt to clarify the problem with 4 Ezra. The story in 4 Ezra essentially claims that Judaic texts were passed down through many generations until the Babylonian Exile, and at that point all recordings of these books were completely lost due to the chaos and destruction. The only person to retain some memory of these was supposedly Ezra, and even he needed the holy spirit to rest upon him to fully reproduce them. Thus, the chain of tradition was broken into two pieces: Before Ezra and after Ezra.
Frankly, we're looking here at a bit of a logical dilemma: The author of 4 Ezra claims that Ezra wrote 94 books that no one had any copies or memories of, approached the Jews and said: "Hey guys, here are a bunch of books that y'all forgot about, that I have just reproduced." If no one had any memory of them, why would they believe him that the books are valid?
Now, setting aside this logical dilemma, another issue is that there don't appear to be any other sources that validate the author of 4 Ezra's claim that all of the texts were lost. He's the only person who happened to be aware of this cataclysm! None of the prophets from the time of the destruction of the Temple and the Babylonian Exile make any mention of this! Truly odd, I must say.
Finally, yes, there are multiple Jewish sources that attest to the unbroken chain. The most famous is the mishnah in Avot 1:1:

"Moses received the Torah at Sinai and transmitted it to Joshua, Joshua to the elders, and the elders to the prophets, and the prophets to the Men of the Great Assembly."​

The next mishnayot in the chapter describe teachings of the next links in the chain, those that came after the Men of the Great Assembly.

Would it not make sense that such a horrific event in Jewish history would be recorded elsewhere? I can easily see multiple midrashim by our sages explaining what Israel did to deserve such a punishment. Yet no such midrashim exist. Truly odd.
I don't think that is his view and it certainly isn't mine.
I'm sorry if I misunderstood you, and you perhaps are more familiar with that person - I don't even know his name, as you may be able to tell, but that is what I gathered from what he said.
What makes you say this?
Many many sources. Too large a topic to tackle it right now. Maybe someone else could sum it up. @rosends, could you perhaps sum up why we believe that the sages of the past were greater than us?
But IF (and again, just as an idea - IF) the Messiah did arrive for the first time in the first century and events took place according to the Besorah - they could be the possibility of some adaptability being made to traditions. Just as many traditions were introduced by the time of the first century, loosely under the authority of Torah, and supposedly according to "oral traditions" handed down from Mosheh. Judaism has seemed to grow quite about since Sinai.
What authority does this "messiah" have to change ancient traditions?
And are you saying you don't believe in the existence of the Oral Law?
Ah yes, the Talmud...

To be completely honest, I don't think we're going to be able to agree on the authority of the Talmud. I appreciate it's importance to your community - but I don't recognise it's authority any more than you would in the book of MattitiYahu for example :) So it's difficult to comment on what it says.
I hope you'll remain consistent with this position and not be one of those Christians who denounce the Talmud until they can use it to "prove" Christianity.
With that said, my comment on Jubilees was intended to to present a possible Jewish view of the book, not to convince you that our view is correct. Likely none of what I've written so far has convinced you that the Jews are correct in our view of the apocryphal works, so we'll just add Rav's tradition as recorded in Bava Batra to the pile.

Final note for this post: Why do you spell Yehoshua and Yehudah with an "a" after the "Y"? That's not how they're pronounced in Hebrew. Believe me, the theophoric bit remains theophoric however it's pronounced in Hebrew or spelled in English.
 

dybmh

דניאל יוסף בן מאיר הירש
The context of that New Testament verse was that Jesus making a point about the priorities God the Father gave him and testing the woman's faith and teaching a lesson to his disciples.
He gets 1 messianic-demerit for not saying what he means.

The fig tree, moving mountains, eating flesh drinking blood, hating parents.... Very truly I tell you, these demerits are starting to add up.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
He gets 1 messianic-demerit for not saying what he means.

The fig tree, moving mountains, eating flesh drinking blood, hating parents.... Very truly I tell you, these demerits are starting to add up.

There was no Eucharist in the Mithras religion.

Is Jesus Simply a Retelling of the Mithras Mythology? | Cold Case Christianity

Claim: Mithraic believers celebrated a Eucharist or “Lord’s Supper”
Truth: Followers of Mithras did not celebrate a Eucharist, but they did celebrate a fellowship meal regularly, just as did many other groups in the Roman world.Mithras isn’t much like Jesus after all. It’s not unusual for the characteristics of ancient pre-Christian deities to be exaggerated in an effort to make them sound like Jesus.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member

Messiah and Savior are terms that have overlap but there's a difference. messiah - Dictionary Definition

A messiah is anyone who is thought of as the savior of a group of people. You might think of your English teacher as your messiah when she argues with the school principal against mandatory school uniforms — and wins!

The word messiah is often used in a religious context to refer to a messenger of God — that is, someone appointed to save people who are in any way oppressed. In the Christian faith, Jesus Christ is considered a messiah. The word can also be used to talk about anyone who seeks justice and helps out those who are powerless. For example, in a comic book, a superhero could be considered a messiah.

Jesus is the Messiah of Israel because he will rule the nations righteously from Jerusalem in the future. Jesus is the Savior of the world because he died for every single person.
 

rosends

Well-Known Member
Many many sources. Too large a topic to tackle it right now. Maybe someone else could sum it up. @rosends, could you perhaps sum up why we believe that the sages of the past were greater than us?
The easiest answer is an analogy to my world -- academia and audio production.
Make a photocopy of a text, get a copy. Make a copy of the copy, get a slightly degraded copy. Each generation of copies is lesser than the one before. The same holds true for audio cassettes and copying from a copy. The further away from the original, the less "perfect" the version is.

In a more religious sense, the concept is yeridat hadorot. This concept makes sense logically -- people who spent their entire lives memorizing, arguing and studying are better equipped to have an opinion than someone who spends time understanding, years later, what those first people were trying to say.
 

dybmh

דניאל יוסף בן מאיר הירש
Either he didn't say what he meant ( most likely ) or he was influenced by African and Greek religious practices ( less likely ).

Messiah and Savior are terms that have overlap but there's a difference. messiah - Dictionary Definition
Without world peace, there is no messiah or savior.
Jesus is the Messiah of Israel because he will rule the nations righteously from Jerusalem in the future.
"Will be" it hasn't happened in 2000 years. This is wishful thinking, nothing more.
Jesus is the Savior of the world because he died for every single person.
His death accomplished nothing. The story has encouraged idol worship. If there's any truth to it, we can benefit from not making the same mistakes he did.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
Either he didn't say what he meant ( most likely ) or he was influenced by African and Greek religious practices ( less likely ).


Without world peace, there is no messiah or savior.

"Will be" it hasn't happened in 2000 years. This is wishful thinking, nothing more.

His death accomplished nothing. The story has encouraged idol worship. If there's any truth to it, we can benefit from not making the same mistakes he did.

Jesus will righteously rule the kingdoms of the world from Jerusalem at his second coming. Does the Old Testament truly predict a second advent of the Messiah? | GotQuestions.org

A careful look at Old Testament prophecies shows an underlying assumption of two advents. Micah 5:2 and Isaiah 7:14 predict the first advent. Separately, Isaiah 53:8–9 predicts a suffering and dying Messiah, who will be given life and greatness according to Isaiah 53:11–12. Daniel 9:26 describes the Messiah being killed after His appearance. At the same time, prophets such as Zechariah (Zechariah 12:10) say this same “pierced” Messiah will be seen again by His enemies. So the clues are there.
 

dybmh

דניאל יוסף בן מאיר הירש
A careful look at Old Testament prophecies shows an underlying assumption of two advents. Micah 5:2 and Isaiah 7:14 predict the first advent. Separately, Isaiah 53:8–9 predicts a suffering and dying Messiah, who will be given life and greatness according to Isaiah 53:11–12. Daniel 9:26 describes the Messiah being killed after His appearance. At the same time, prophets such as Zechariah (Zechariah 12:10) say this same “pierced” Messiah will be seen again by His enemies. So the clues are there.

This is a mess. As I told you before:
Micah describes a ruler, that's not your messiah.
Isaiah 53 is out because verse 10 doesn't describe your messiah.
Isaiah 7:14 has no connection except the name Immanuel.
Daniel, iir, describes an annointed king, that's not your messiah either.
Zecharia describes someone peirced, maybe, but that could be any martyr who is injured in battle.

So at best you have a verse in Zecharia. One verse is does not support this 2nd advent concept.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
This is a mess. As I told you before:
Micah describes a ruler, that's not your messiah.
Isaiah 53 is out because verse 10 doesn't describe your messiah.
Isaiah 7:14 has no connection except the name Immanuel.
Daniel, iir, describes an annointed king, that's not your messiah either.
Zecharia describes someone peirced, maybe, but that could be any martyr who is injured in battle.

So at best you have a verse in Zecharia. One verse is does not support this 2nd advent concept.

Daniel 9:24-27 is a messianic prophecy.

Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.

Does Daniel 9:24-27 predict the coming of Jesus? | carm.org

Evaluation as an Apologetic Argument
There are many good reasons to use this text in an apologetic case for Jesus as the Messiah. First, though it is difficult to demonstrate the exact time of the decree for the start date or the exact date of Christ’s crucifixion, Daniel definitely predicts an event that would take place extremely close to Christ’s life. The skeptics would have difficulty arguing that this text is mistaken. Second, the fact that this is a Messianic prophecy is not up for debate. Even the Jewish Rabbi Rashi interpreted the text as referring to events in the first century relating to the Messiah.31 The passage even uses the word Messiah! Third, it seems reasonable to argue there is a gap between the sixty-ninth and seventieth weeks. Therefore, it seems reasonable to conclude that this text at least predicts the exact year of the Messiah’s coming, which was fulfilled in Christ.
 
Last edited:

dybmh

דניאל יוסף בן מאיר הירש
Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.
You skipped verse 25.

25 And you shall know and understand that from the emergence of the word to restore and to rebuild Jerusalem until the anointed king [shall be] seven weeks, and [for] sixty-two weeks it will return and be built street and moat, but in troubled times.

Daniel 9 isn't your messiah. I'm glad we cleared that up.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
You skipped verse 25.

25 And you shall know and understand that from the emergence of the word to restore and to rebuild Jerusalem until the anointed king [shall be] seven weeks, and [for] sixty-two weeks it will return and be built street and moat, but in troubled times.

Daniel 9 isn't your messiah. I'm glad we cleared that up.

Jesus is the anointed king. He will rule Israel in the future. Some things in the Scriptures you don't notice unless you read it many times. People notice things in the Bible that they didn't notice before when they read it over and over.

Does the Old Testament truly predict a second advent of the Messiah? | GotQuestions.org

Many Old Testament prophecies foretell the ultimate triumph of Christ, which will occur at the second advent. These include statements from the books of Zechariah (Zechariah 9:14–15; 12:10–14; 13:1; 9:14–15); Amos (Amos 9:11–15); Jeremiah (Jeremiah 30:18; 32:44; 33:11, 26); and Joel (Joel 3:1); which describe the Messiah coming in triumph to lead Israel into salvation. Note that these are in the context of passages such as Deuteronomy 30:3–5 and so are predictions of the time of Messiah’s final victory.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
no, he's not. never anointed, never a king.

Jesus will be the king of the world in his second advent. Does the Old Testament truly predict a second advent of the Messiah? | GotQuestions.org

Many Old Testament prophecies foretell the ultimate triumph of Christ, which will occur at the second advent. These include statements from the books of Zechariah (Zechariah 9:14–15; 12:10–14; 13:1; 9:14–15); Amos (Amos 9:11–15); Jeremiah (Jeremiah 30:18; 32:44; 33:11, 26); and Joel (Joel 3:1); which describe the Messiah coming in triumph to lead Israel into salvation. Note that these are in the context of passages such as Deuteronomy 30:3–5 and so are predictions of the time of Messiah’s final victory.

Also, Scripture records Jesus making direct comparisons to Old Testament prophecies when making His own claims to a second advent. For example, His words in Matthew 24:31 and Mark 13:27 parallel the descriptions of Isaiah 52:15 and Isaiah 59—62.
 

Yahcubs777

Active Member
That article is complete drivel. Do you know how many portions of Tanach are not read in synagogue? I'll clue you in: A ton. Why? Because the Tanach readings in synagogue are not intended to cover the entire Tanach. They serve a different purpose. They're not like the Torah readings, which do cover the entire Torah.

Now, do Jews study Isaiah 53? We most certainly do. This is evidenced by the fact that we have debated with you, @Skywalker, countless times over this.

That missionary claiming he shows "Orthodox Jews" Isaiah 53 and they state it's about Jesus? Either they weren't Orthodox Jews, who have actually studied the Tanach, or he's a complete and utter liar. Knowing Messianic missionaries, I'm voting for the latter.

I recommend actually checking out your sources and scooting away from those lying missionaries.

Isaiah 53 is about Adam.
 

Yahcubs777

Active Member
Daniel 9:24-27 is a messianic prophecy.

Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy.

Does Daniel 9:24-27 predict the coming of Jesus? | carm.org

No this is speaking of the stone hewn without hands, the Son of Man, Elijah.
 

Yahcubs777

Active Member
Either he didn't say what he meant ( most likely ) or he was influenced by African and Greek religious practices ( less likely ).


Without world peace, there is no messiah or savior.

"Will be" it hasn't happened in 2000 years. This is wishful thinking, nothing more.

His death accomplished nothing. The story has encouraged idol worship. If there's any truth to it, we can benefit from not making the same mistakes he did.

HIS crucifixion accomplished a few things. The bail price of Father Adam and Mother Eve, and the adumbration of what the Romans would do to the Word of GOD. And an evidence of what they did to HIM so we could know who outlet enemy is. And so we could come to know the Son of GOD Adam, His Eminence by looking at the things HEs said and did in the earth.
 

Yahcubs777

Active Member
This is a mess. As I told you before:
Micah describes a ruler, that's not your messiah.
Isaiah 53 is out because verse 10 doesn't describe your messiah.
Isaiah 7:14 has no connection except the name Immanuel.
Daniel, iir, describes an annointed king, that's not your messiah either.
Zecharia describes someone peirced, maybe, but that could be any martyr who is injured in battle.

So at best you have a verse in Zecharia. One verse is does not support this 2nd advent concept.

But Immanuel doesn't mean The Son of GOD it means GOD with us.
 
Top