How is Jesus held in Judaism?

[Monster!]

I know that in Islam he's a prophet and I know how us Christians think of him but I don't know how he's held in Judaism, is he a prophet or something? X

 

[Tarheeler]

I know that in Islam he's a prophet and I know how us Christians think of him but I don't know how he's held in Judaism, is he a prophet or something? X

He's not held as anything. Jesus plays no part in our religion.

 

[dantech]

I know that in Islam he's a prophet and I know how us Christians think of him but I don't know how he's held in Judaism, is he a prophet or something? X

Jesus is a prophet in Islam?

 

[Storm]

Jesus is a prophet in Islam?

Yeppers.

 

[Dena]

Jesus is a prophet in Islam?

Yep. And if you look you'll notice some Muslims add the (pbuh) when writing his name.

 

[Monster!]

Jesus is a prophet in Islam?

Yep, they call him Isa though and they deny his crucifixion, they say God lifted him up to the heavens on his deathbed x

 

[Flankerl]

Like i already wrote a couple of months ago we should simply rename the DIR to "Jesus and/or Mohammed are not part of this religion DIR".

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I know that in Islam he's a prophet and I know how us Christians think of him but I don't know how he's held in Judaism, is he a prophet or something? X

There is no 'Jewish position' on Jesus beyond categorically rejecting the messianic/theologic claims of his diverse followers.

 

[punkdbass]

Judaism holds Jesus to be just a man while Christianity views him being more than a man.

We dont think he was the messiah because the messianic age is not here -- there is no world peace, universal knowledge or worship of God, etc.

Some hold him to be a great rabbi or activist for social justice, a righteous man. but not a Prophet

 

[Caladan]

I know that in Islam he's a prophet and I know how us Christians think of him but I don't know how he's held in Judaism, is he a prophet or something? X

As others have indicated, the Jewish Bible does not include the New Testament. Jesus is not part of the Jewish scriptures (Hebrew Bible) nor part of Jewish theology.
This is the reason I can only comment from a personal level. I think the New Testament is a very potent text, and the narratives of the gospels are very engaging. I find Jesus' perspectives on his contemporary Jewish and Roman society to be very refreshing, and similar in many ways to other of his contemporary Jewish teachers (such as Hillel). But this is all on a personal level, and is not taught by mainstream Judaism.

 

[Levite]

Some hold him to be a great rabbi or activist for social justice, a righteous man. but not a Prophet

Quite true, although it's worth noting that these views of him are almost entirely products of modern liberal and secular Jewish thought. The tradition, when it touches on Jesus or his movement, is usually less forgiving. But then, the tradition tends to have a long and pointed memory for the things done to our people in Jesus' name....

 

[Caladan]

Quite true, although it's worth noting that these views of him are almost entirely products of modern liberal and secular Jewish thought. The tradition, when it touches on Jesus or his movement, is usually less forgiving. But then, the tradition tends to have a long and pointed memory for the things done to our people in Jesus' name....

That's a good point.
As early Christianity enters popular culture today, many Jews are eager to discover this episode in their people's history. The first centuries AD, the Eastern Mediterranean, the Roman world, and the alternative aspects of Jewish society during this time.
One of the most profound discoveries for me when I read the New Testament for the first time was how Jewish the text really is. It changed my perspective about who Jesus was, and about historical Christianity.

 

[Harmonious]

He's not held as anything. Jesus plays no part in our religion.

I'm with you on this one.

 

[Harmonious]

That's a good point.
As early Christianity enters popular culture today, many Jews are eager to discover this episode in their people's history. The first centuries AD, the Eastern Mediterranean, the Roman world, and the alternative aspects of Jewish society during this time.
One of the most profound discoveries for me when I read the New Testament for the first time was how Jewish the text really is. It changed my perspective about who Jesus was, and about historical Christianity.

Interesting.

At some point, and in a different online bulletin board, someone asked/challenged me to read the Gospels. That person felt that I would have a much better understanding of what it is that Christians believe, and felt that perhaps I would even agree with them.

I remember reading, and commenting as I read, giving my impressions as I went.

Before I began this exercise, I had believed that Jesus was an interesting and charismatic teacher, if somewhat misguided, and that he was well-meaning and a good man.

As I read, the more I read, the less I liked about Jesus, if he actually did all that he is depicted as doing.

I came away from my reading of the gospels (and Hebrews and Revelations, as I was requested to read) believing that Jesus was a mean, petty man, a vicious slanderer, who at best was a false prophet (which is punishable by death, in the right circumstances). At worst, he disrespected elders and scholars, he overturned money tables right before Passover, he humiliated his disciples and was worse to everyone else, and unspeakably rude to non-Jews (however helpful he might have been after the fact).

I did not find there to be any aspect of the gospels "Jewish," except as a bad effort to mimic the style of Jeremiah and some of the more outspoken "nay-sayers" of the later prophets.

The more I read, the more I realized that in order to believe these scriptures, said reader had to 1) come into it already believing that Jesus could do no wrong, 2) believe that so many Jews in important positions would actually forget how to be Jewish, particularly around Passover, 3) be ready to believe that the "source" for Jewish law was petty and corrupt, and therefore be ready to be thankful that Jesus had come to save us from ourselves.

The more I read, the less respect I had for the person Jesus was depicted as being and the authors of the works themselves. I had to stop reading, as I realized that there was no way I could be honest in my reactions and polite about what I was reading at the same time.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

One of the most profound discoveries for me when I read the New Testament for the first time was how Jewish the text really is. It changed my perspective about who Jesus was, and about historical Christianity.

Interesting - I see it as pervasively Hellenistic.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Quite true, although it's worth noting that these views of him are almost entirely products of modern liberal and secular Jewish thought.

A very good point.

 

[Caladan]

I came away from my reading of the gospels (and Hebrews and Revelations, as I was requested to read) believing that Jesus was a mean, petty man, a vicious slanderer, who at best was a false prophet (which is punishable by death, in the right circumstances). At worst, he disrespected elders and scholars, he overturned money tables right before Passover, he humiliated his disciples and was worse to everyone else, and unspeakably rude to non-Jews (however helpful he might have been after the fact).

I respect your perspective. But it's interesting that it seems that some of the things that I liked about Jesus and the narrative of the gospels are the same things you hated about it. I think the scene at the Temple, when Jesus turned the tables of the money changers is a very memorable one and I highly relate to it. I can easily see how the Temple has been defiled with small time crooks back then, as many religious figures or common folk do today.
I also see a huge difference between the second Temple period priesthood and the Biblical heroes. Just like I despise many things in the Rabbinate's monopoly in modern Israel today, I can guess where Jesus was coming from.
I loved how Jesus outwitted people who OKed harming others with the guise of religion.

I did not find there to be any aspect of the gospels "Jewish," except as a bad effort to mimic the style of Jeremiah and some of the more outspoken "nay-sayers" of the later prophets.

The society in the gospels is largely Jewish. Most of the protagonists, antagonists, common people, and various characters in the narrative are Jewish, the traditions are Jewish, and much of the debate is involving Judaism and Second Temple era Jewish classes.

The more I read, the more I realized that in order to believe these scriptures, said reader had to 1) come into it already believing that Jesus could do no wrong

I don't see that. While many Christians may believe that, not all readers and students of the New Testament are Christians.

2) believe that so many Jews in important positions would actually forget how to be Jewish, particularly around Passover

What made you come to this conclusion? it's not the observance of rituals or commandments that people examine in the gospels, but how religion can become a set of empty and mindless rituals as they become devoid of humanity and morality.

3) be ready to believe that the "source" for Jewish law was petty and corrupt, and therefore be ready to be thankful that Jesus had come to save us from ourselves.

I do have many issues with many aspects of Jewish law. As many traditions are embodied in oral traditions I definitely feel embarrassed by some of the things written. While occasionally there are people who take Talmudic paragraphs out of context and butcher the text in order to show Jews in a bad light, some things written there are truly appalling.

 

[dantech]

I do have many issues with many aspects of Jewish law. As many traditions are embodied in oral traditions I definitely feel embarrassed by some of the things written. While occasionally there are people who take Talmudic paragraphs out of context and butcher the text in order to show Jews in a bad light, some things written there are truly appalling.

Please mention one or two as I am curious to see what you might be talking about

 

[Harmonious]

I respect your perspective. But it's interesting that it seems that some of the things that I liked about Jesus and the narrative of the gospels are the same things you hated about it. I think the scene at the Temple, when Jesus turned the tables of the money changers is a very memorable one and I highly relate to it. I can easily see how the Temple has been defiled with small time crooks back then, as many religious figures or common folk do today.

You see someone protesting corruption.

I see someone throwing a temper tantrum and disturbing Passover preparation for countless Jews coming in from all over the place. He could have made his stand after Sh'vi'i Shel Pesach. But no... It was the week of Passover, when people were changing money, getting their animals checked to make sure they were kosher and well enough to be used as Karbanot...

You live in Israel. You can't tell me that you have missed countless people cleaning for Passover. You are considering the corruption-fighting freedom fighter. I am considering the poor people who were traveling for days, have a million things to do, and then to have this brainless man-child throw a tantrum and add MORE hours to an already busy preparation time for however many people were not serviced before the animals he scattered were recollected and the currency tables were reorganized.

I also see a huge difference between the second Temple period priesthood and the Biblical heroes. Just like I despise many things in the Rabbinate's monopoly in modern Israel today, I can guess where Jesus was coming from.

There were many things in the Second Temple that were to be admired. There were many things in the Second Temple that were embarrassing.

The Cohanim might have had a Sadducee infestation they needed to battle, but they weren't the only Cohanim at the time. There were many Cohanim who tried to do the right thing. Learn Gemara Yoma at some point.

Not all Cohanim were corrupt. But you know... The authors of the gospels pretty much lumped "Pharisees", "Rabbis", and "Priests" in the same basket, without distinction or idea that not every last one of any given group had the same level of problem spots as every other.

I loved how Jesus outwitted people who OKed harming others with the guise of religion.

You know, during the Second Temple as much as now, it truly pains me to see Rabbis and Jews in authority using religion as a weapon with which to hurt people.

I'm all about teaching people, and loving people. It PAINS me to see holier-than-thou Jews refusing students in Yeshivot for not being "religious" enough, or whatever campaign I've heard of recently about targeting women who wear "too-brightly-colored" clothes, or whatever nonsense some Jews spout in the name of "religion".

The idea that so many Jews are so concerned with their "Adam l'Makom" service and have completely forgotten any semblance of "Adam l'Chaveiro" commandments make me cry, when I realize that no matter how hard I try to do the right thing and serve God and Man, THESE idiots are who people see when certain people think of "Orthodox Jews."

If you have ever read an account of Kamtza Bar Kamtza, you will see that there was a LOT of baseless hatred, gossip, and other problems of this type towards the end of the Second Temple.

Jesus "getting one over" doesn't really seem to actually help, as much as fan the flames, just in a different direction.

The society in the gospels is largely Jewish. Most of the protagonists, antagonists, common people, and various characters in the narrative are Jewish, the traditions are Jewish, and much of the debate is involving Judaism and Second Temple era Jewish classes.

Yes. I see that. But it also means that so many of the characters involved have forgotten basic commandments. They forgot "how to be Jewish."

The idea that any weight was given to the words of a man who said "None come to the Father but through me" means that many people rather missed a serious message.

There is SO very much wrong with how Jews were depicted that yes, Jews were the protagonists, antagonists, common people. But it was like a very BAD fan-fiction, where the author, so hell-bent on getting the particular character interaction he is looking for, forgot the canon-character behaviors and it is stilted and forced.

(I write fan-fiction, so I know about the good, the bad, and the "what were they thinking, this is so unbelievably bad".)

I don't see that. While many Christians may believe that, not all readers and students of the New Testament are Christians.

The people who are set to believe this either 1) are predisposed to believe Jesus was right, or 2) are predisposed to believe that the Jews were as bad as depicted.

If a person doesn't come into reading the gospels without at least one of these to suppositions, I don't see how a person can come away even LIKING Jesus' character.

What made you come to this conclusion? it's not the observance of rituals or commandments that people examine in the gospels, but how religion can become a set of empty and mindless rituals as they become devoid of humanity and morality.

The whole "Sanhedrin met on Passover to proclaim Jesus guilty and turn him over to the non-Jewish authority" thing is a pretty big one.

This means that Jews who lived during the Temple era 1) forgot that courts don't adjourn over Yom Tov, particularly not in the Court of Hewn Stone, 2) capital cases weren't tried in the Temple once the official governing body moved to Yavne, which happened before Jesus was in his 20s, 3) handing a Jew over to non-Jewish authorities is a very serious crime, especially when the penalty involved is for the person being handed over is to be killed. However, the "Sanhedrin" was supposed to forget ALL of these things.

There are lots of other things which I've pointed out before, but this is one of the biggest bugaboos.

I do have many issues with many aspects of Jewish law. As many traditions are embodied in oral traditions I definitely feel embarrassed by some of the things written. While occasionally there are people who take Talmudic paragraphs out of context and butcher the text in order to show Jews in a bad light, some things written there are truly appalling.

I'm with Dan on this one. I'd like to discuss what you are talking about.

 

[dantech]

You see someone protesting corruption.

I see someone throwing a temper tantrum and disturbing Passover preparation for countless Jews coming in from all over the place. He could have made his stand after Sh'vi'i Shel Pesach. But no... It was the week of Passover, when people were changing money, getting their animals checked to make sure they were kosher and well enough to be used as Karbanot...

You live in Israel. You can't tell me that you have missed countless people cleaning for Passover. You are considering the corruption-fighting freedom fighter. I am considering the poor people who were traveling for days, have a million things to do, and then to have this brainless man-child throw a tantrum and add MORE hours to an already busy preparation time for however many people were not serviced before the animals he scattered were recollected and the currency tables were reorganized.

There were many things in the Second Temple that were to be admired. There were many things in the Second Temple that were embarrassing.

The Cohanim might have had a Sadducee infestation they needed to battle, but they weren't the only Cohanim at the time. There were many Cohanim who tried to do the right thing. Learn Gemara Yoma at some point.

Not all Cohanim were corrupt. But you know... The authors of the gospels pretty much lumped "Pharisees", "Rabbis", and "Priests" in the same basket, without distinction or idea that not every last one of any given group had the same level of problem spots as every other.

You know, during the Second Temple as much as now, it truly pains me to see Rabbis and Jews in authority using religion as a weapon with which to hurt people.

I'm all about teaching people, and loving people. It PAINS me to see holier-than-thou Jews refusing students in Yeshivot for not being "religious" enough, or whatever campaign I've heard of recently about targeting women who wear "too-brightly-colored" clothes, or whatever nonsense some Jews spout in the name of "religion".

The idea that so many Jews are so concerned with their "Adam l'Makom" service and have completely forgotten any semblance of "Adam l'Chaveiro" commandments make me cry, when I realize that no matter how hard I try to do the right thing and serve God and Man, THESE idiots are who people see when certain people think of "Orthodox Jews."

If you have ever read an account of Kamtza Bar Kamtza, you will see that there was a LOT of baseless hatred, gossip, and other problems of this type towards the end of the Second Temple.

Jesus "getting one over" doesn't really seem to actually help, as much as fan the flames, just in a different direction.

Yes. I see that. But it also means that so many of the characters involved have forgotten basic commandments. They forgot "how to be Jewish."

The idea that any weight was given to the words of a man who said "None come to the Father but through me" means that many people rather missed a serious message.

There is SO very much wrong with how Jews were depicted that yes, Jews were the protagonists, antagonists, common people. But it was like a very BAD fan-fiction, where the author, so hell-bent on getting the particular character interaction he is looking for, forgot the canon-character behaviors and it is stilted and forced.

(I write fan-fiction, so I know about the good, the bad, and the "what were they thinking, this is so unbelievably bad".)

The people who are set to believe this either 1) are predisposed to believe Jesus was right, or 2) are predisposed to believe that the Jews were as bad as depicted.

If a person doesn't come into reading the gospels without at least one of these to suppositions, I don't see how a person can come away even LIKING Jesus' character.

The whole "Sanhedrin met on Passover to proclaim Jesus guilty and turn him over to the non-Jewish authority" thing is a pretty big one.

This means that Jews who lived during the Temple era 1) forgot that courts don't adjourn over Yom Tov, particularly not in the Court of Hewn Stone, 2) capital cases weren't tried in the Temple once the official governing body moved to Yavne, which happened before Jesus was in his 20s, 3) handing a Jew over to non-Jewish authorities is a very serious crime, especially when the penalty involved is for the person being handed over is to be killed. However, the "Sanhedrin" was supposed to forget ALL of these things.

There are lots of other things which I've pointed out before, but this is one of the biggest bugaboos.

I'm with Dan on this one. I'd like to discuss what you are talking about.

I don't study up too much on whatever is not part of Judaism. I, personally feel like the more I know about myself, the better! I rather spend my time studying Jewish texts and Gemarot than learning the new testament, etc... But i could certainly understand the interest in understanding the "other side's" opinion!

Anyways, I just wanted to say that I didn't know a bunch of things about what you just said, and am very impressed at how you answered in this post. It's a great post, and keep it up Harmonious!