Moses said, Unto him ye shall hearken

[IndigoChild5559]

And there arose not a prophet since in Israel like unto Moses, whom the LORD knew face to face,

Are you saying that this verse contradicts the other? Christians believe that Jesus was a prophet greater than Moses.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

Jesus was a nice Jewish man who aspired to be the messiah but failed. He simply did not fulfill the prophecies.

To be honest, we don't even know historically from valid Jewish sources if was a "nice" Jewish man or hardly anything else. There are some who think the stories about him may have been inspired by one or more individuals who may have lived about 100 years prior the the events the NT claims and said individual(s) made bold claims w/o substance.

Like you mentioned whoever the historical individual may have been is a part of a long list of individuals who made claims that didn't hold up in the end. That is about all we know.

 

[YoursTrue]

Actually, what you described "tefillin" and "reciting the Yigdal" are not interconnected. All Torah based Jews put tefillin either a) only during Shahhrith or b) throughout the day. That is halakha that comes from Mount Sinai.

Further, reciting Yigdal it is not a matter of many. It is a matter some do and some don't. Lastly, if you read the Yigdal in Hebrew and Adon Olam you will see that has some reasons for them that are obvious about staying away from the ideas expressed by missionaries.

You mentioned earlier they were "articles of faith" and from the Rambam. I was correcting you that the Yigdal, you referenced" was not "articles of faith" and that the Rambam did not write the Yigdal.

OK.

 

[YoursTrue]

Jesus was a nice Jewish man who aspired to be the messiah but failed. He simply did not fulfill the prophecies.

He didn't aspire to be the Messiah. He was the Messiah. Furthermore, what prophecies do you say the Messiah must fulfill in order to be the Messiah?

 

[YoursTrue]

It was written down because it was something that happened and it was information that had been passed down. Melakchim (Kings) was a collection of histories that were compilled together by the Hakhamim of Israel. It is not information of a binding nature like the Torah. If a Jew had never heard of the text Melakhim but they had the Torah and the Halakha they could function perfectly fine.

Of course there would have to be emendations. I see. A "binding nature." I remember some throwing a chicken in the sea at Yom Kippur as if that were a sacrificial offering. Anyway.
The thing is, the Jews heard of the resurrections by the prophets such as Elijah and Elisha, that is, if they ever read about them. It is recorded for all posterity. Still reading from the law of Moses. It's almost like Moses-worship, now that you mention about the Torah, I'm assuming you mean by that the five books of Moses. As if the prophets weren't worth much. Thanks for mentioning about the Kings, I'll do a little research into the prophets soon as I have time to see how well they were treated by the populace, their kinsmen.

 

[YoursTrue]

To be honest, we don't even know historical from valid Jewish source if was a "nice" Jewish man or hardly anything else. There are some who think the stories about him may have been inspired by one or more individuals who may have lived about 100 years prior the the events the NT claims and made bold claims w/o substance.

Like you mentioned whoever the historical individual may have been is a part of a long list of individuals who made claims that didn't hold up in the end. That is about all we know.

Some didn't think he was too "nice," that's for sure.

 

[YoursTrue]

It was written down because it was something that happened and it was information that had been passed down. Melakchim (Kings) was a collection of histories that were compilled together by the Hakhamim of Israel. It is not information of a binding nature like the Torah. If a Jew had never heard of the text Melakhim but they had the Torah and the Halakha they could function perfectly fine.

Not a binding nature? I mean like you think maybe resurrections never happened? (of a "binding nature"?)

 

[YoursTrue]

Yes, we knew this would be the case:

For the children of Israel shall remain for many days, having neither king, nor prince, nor sacrifice, nor pillar, nor ephod nor teraphim. - Hoshea 3:4.

So it's no problem on our end.

Tell you what I find interesting. That when the children of Israel had kings, sacrificial offerings, ephod and teraphim, they had also serious problems. But thanks for mentioning that scripture.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

He didn't aspire to be the Messiah. He was the Messiah. Furthermore, what prophecies do you say the Messiah must fulfill in order to be the Messiah?

What IndigoChild5559 is trying to you is that you may think he was a "messiah." We Jews know he was not a Davidic King who kept and he did not keep Torah and halakha nor teach the Jewish people Torah and halakha as Hashem, the Torah and the Nevi'im describe a Davidic King would do and must do.

Further, it is not our place, as Jews, to tell Christians what to beleive - if you beleive the truth is as you say then that is for you to parse through in your life. You have your standards for how you determine reality - you simply have to deal the reality that we Jews were given different standards by Hashem.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

Not a binding nature? I mean like you think maybe resurrections never happened? (of a "binding nature"?)

How to explain this to you simply. hmmmm

Not binding, meaning that we do not get theology and mitzvoth from a history book that describes a particular era in history. Kings is a history book of the successes and failure to keep the Torah during that era - not a book of mitzvoth. It was compiled by the Hachamim or the Jewish people to keep a record of history and we often learn from it in terms of the successes and failures of ancestors, jut like any other history. Yet, if some Torah based Jewish community was isolated away from other Jews before the book of Melachim (Kings) was compiled and all they had was the Torah and the halakha from the time period they were isolated - they would still be able to function properly w/o having ever read Kings.

Melachim (Kings) contains SOME of the interesting aspects of Israeli history, but by no means all of it. A story about someone being brought back from the dead, potentially or not, does not bring along with it something that I "must" think or do. The Torah on the other hand carries with it things that I must do to develop in my thinking correctly, things I must do, in some areas I shouldn't do, and in some areas things I can do because Hashem sanctioned that this was the use of the Torah and how it was to be transmitted to future generations of Jew.

The Torah (five books) is the basis for Jewish thought, practice, action, culture, and is binding because of how it was given and what Hashem stated about it. When a Torah scroll is written there are extremely strict and rigerous rules for making a copy of it. The book of Kings is not on that level and doesn't have those kinds of rules since. Rules for copying it exist but not to the levels of a Torah scroll.

If I sit down and write a modern history of events that have been happening in modern Israel to Torah based and non-Torah based Israelis (including some things that appear to been of an amazing and supernatural nature) and a future generation's Mosaic court decides to add what I wrote to the Tanakh, in the section for writings, that is in the realm of possibility since the entire contents of the Tanakh was approved by a past Mosaic court.

Further, in the age when there will be a Davidic King, a Torah based nation here in Israel, the Temple in Jerusalem, a Mosaic court, the return of the Jews outside of Israel, and a world a peace we Jews will no longer use the prophetic texts and writings of the Tanakh. What will remain is the Torah as it always is and on Purim the book of Esther.

This video I did years ago may help a bit.

I hope that makes it clear.

 

[Redemptionsong]

Jesus was a nice Jewish man who aspired to be the messiah but failed. He simply did not fulfill the prophecies.

Let's have you agree that the Prophet must be the Messiah, then we can look at Jesus' credentials.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

Some didn't think he was too "nice," that's for sure.

That is not what I mean. I mean, historically, there are no valid sources that confirm the existance of anyone like the person claimed in the NT. I.e. if he did even exist historically he definately did not keep Torah or bring Jews to the Torah. Whoever the historical individual may have been is a part of a long list of individuals who made claims that didn't hold up in the end.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

Let's have you agree that the Prophet must be the Messiah, then we can look at Jesus' credentials.

That would probably not be wise. That list, based on the standards from Hashem to the people of Israel/Jews, has already been posted earlier in this thread at least two to three times.

There is a easier resolution.

1. Christians claim that Jesus meets their standards for what the beleive in.
2. We Jews have a different of standards, from Hashem, and also ways of checking if someone meets them, also from Hashem. To date no one has met them in full, as

 

[Redemptionsong]

That would probably not be wise. That list, based on the standards from Hashem to the people of Israel/Jews, has already been posted earlier in this thread at least two to three times.

There is a easier resolution.

1. Christians claim that Jesus meets their standards for what the beleive in.
2. We Jews have a different of standards, from Hashem, and also ways of checking if someone meets them, also from Hashem. To date no one has met them in full, as

If we're referring to the prophecies of the second coming, the coming of the King of Kings, then l'm in full agreement that there are still outstanding prophecies. But there's a distinction between the suffering servant, Messiah son of Joseph, and the Messiah son of David.

To a Christian the two Messiahs are one and the same Jesus, come twice.

How do you equate Zechariah 9:9 with the coming of the Messiah, son of David?

And what credentials will the Jewish son of David possess, given that the genealogies have now been destroyed?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

He didn't aspire to be the Messiah. He was the Messiah. Furthermore, what prophecies do you say the Messiah must fulfill in order to be the Messiah?

For example, the messiah is to usher in an era of worldwide peace.
He is to bring all the Jews back to the Land.
He is to be David, aka rule from Jerusalem.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Let's have you agree that the Prophet must be the Messiah, then we can look at Jesus' credentials.

No, the prophet doesn't need to be the messiah. As I said earlier, the prophet was Joshua, who led the people into the promised land.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

If we're referring to the prophecies of the second coming, the coming of the King of Kings, then l'm in full agreement that there are still outstanding prophecies. But there's a distinction between the suffering servant, Messiah son of Joseph, and the Messiah son of David.

To a Christian the two Messiahs are one and the same Jesus, come twice.

How do you equate Zechariah 9:9 with the coming of the Messiah, son of David?

And what credentials will the Jewish son of David possess, given that the genealogies have now been destroyed?

There are no prophecies of 2nd comings in the Hebrew text of the Tanakh. The second coming is something that only exists in Christian texts in Greek and in translations of the Greek.

The mashiahh ben Yoseph concept is a concept found in the Talmud and Geonic writings and not a requirement. FURTHER, all the texts that even mention this concept are clear that if there is an "anointed one" from a non-Davidic line it will be temporary and that mashiahh ben Yoseph is a descedent (paternally) of the tribe of Epharyim/i.e. Yoseph. The reason that Christians consider there to be two messiah's is because they are unclear on the real meaning of the word (משיח). That word does not mean messiah. Thus, if it did the Aaronic priest, mentioned in the Torah, who was supposed to speak to the Israeli army before a war would also be a messiah since he is called a (הכהן המשיח). This is the only place in the Tanakh where the word (המשיח) the anointed one. Again, someone knows Hebrew knows exactly what I am talking about.

Also, the geneologies of Jews have not been destroyed. There are a large number of Jews here in Israel who have known ancestral lines. There are a number of families here in Israel who have known Davidic descent, Aaronic descent, and Levitic descent. (There are families that have last names that bear their connection back to King David through Solomon - Solomon being required) The way the situation will be resolved in terms of making someone officially a king is for the Mosaic court to be established and to very the potential person's background.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

How do you equate Zechariah 9:9 with the coming of the Messiah, son of David?

The only way to understand any part of Zecharya (Zechariah) is to start at Chapter 1 and read all the way to the end.

 

[Redemptionsong]

There are no prophecies of 2nd comings in the Hebrew text of the Tanakh. The second coming is something that only exists in Christian texts in Greek and in translations of the Greek.

The mashiahh ben Yoseph concept is a concept found in the Talmud and Geonic writings and not a requirement. FURTHER, all the texts that even mention this concept are clear that if there is an "anointed one" from a non-Davidic line it will be temporary and that mashiahh ben Yoseph is a descedent (paternally) of the tribe of Epharyim/i.e. Yoseph. The reason that Christians consider there to be two messiah's is because they are unclear on the real meaning of the word (משיח). That word does not mean messiah. Thus, if it did the Aaronic priest, mentioned in the Torah, who was supposed to speak to the Israeli army before a war would also be a messiah since he is called a (הכהן המשיח). This is the only place in the Tanakh where the word (המשיח) the anointed one. Again, someone knows Hebrew knows exactly what I am talking about.

Also, the geneologies of Jews have not been destroyed. There are a large number of Jews here in Israel who have known ancestral lines. There are a number of families here in Israel who have known Davidic descent, Aaronic descent, and Levitic descent. (There are families that have last names that bear their connection back to King David through Solomon - Solomon being required) The way the situation will be resolved in terms of making someone officially a king is for the Mosaic court to be established and to very the potential person's background.

The problem for Jews who don't accept the first coming is that they expect the Messiah to be born in Bethlehem, when, in reality, he will come again on the clouds from heaven.

To say that Messiah ben Joseph is not a requirement is the same as saying that David, the type of Christ, was not anointed as king prior to being made king.

The LORD said to Samuel, 'I will send thee to Jesse the Bethlehemite; for I have provided me a king among his sons'.[1 Samuel 16:1]

1 Samuel 1:13.'Then Samuel took the horn of oil and anointed him [David] in the midst of his brethren: and the Spirit of the LORD came upon David from that day forward.'

This is the same servant that Isaiah speaks of in Isaiah chapter 11. 'And there shall come forth a rod out of the stem of Jesse, and a Branch shall grow out of his roots: And the spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him, the spirit of wisdom and understanding, the spirit of counsel and might, the spirit of knowledge and of fear of the LORD;'

This is the same servant mentioned in Isaiah 42:1, 'Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighted; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles'.

This is the same servant as mentioned in Isaiah 42:6-8. 'I the LORD have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles;
To open the blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the prison, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison house.'

This is the same servant who reads Isaiah 61 as his own words. 'The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound;'

This is the same servant as mentioned in Isaiah 52:13,14. 'Behold, my servant shall deal prudently, he shall be exalted and extolled, and be very high. As many were astounded at thee; his visage was so marred more than any man, and his form more than the sons of men: So shall he sprinkle many nations; the kings shall shut their mouths at him: for that which had not been told them shall they see; and that which they had not heard shall they consider'.

This is the same servant, and shepherd, the Prophet, who becomes king and brings in the covenant mentioned in Jeremiah 31:31-34. As Ezekiel says, 'And I will set up one shepherd over them, and he shall feed them, even my servant David; he shall feed them, and he shall be their shepherd.
And I the LORD will be their God, and my servant David a prince among them; I the LORD have spoken it' [Ezekiel 34;23,24].

 

[Ehav4Ever]

The problem for Jews who don't accept the first coming is that they expect the Messiah to be born in Bethlehem, when, in reality, he will come again on the clouds from heaven.

Actually, we Jews don't have any problems doing okay.

There is no requirement, from the Hebrew Tanakh, for any future king who descends from David to be born in or come from Beith Lehhem. Someone misinformed you. Again, the standards you bringing up are specific to Christians and the Greek texts and translations you guys use and not from the Hebrew text of the Tanakh.