Why Jews will never accept Jesus

YOu don't think God spoke directly to Moses? You don't believe the bible?
The Lord did speak face to face with Moses.

How did God speak to Jeremiah? Isaiah? All the Prophets? Did He speak face to face with all of them like He did with Moses?
That's the point you miss.
 
  1. God is ECHAD, one, not three in one. Christianity teaches Trinitarianism, which although it is monotheism, is a muddied monotheism. Judaism on the other hand teaches a pure and simple monotheism. Anything that comprises the oneness of God is unthinkable.
God is One in all Three. Two of the Three have a second nature in union with the essence of God.

The Father = Essence of God.
The Son = Essence of God in union with soul. Makes Him the perfect contact point between men (who are souls) and God.
The Holy Spirit= Essence of God in union with spirit (as an angel is a spirit) ... Makes the perfect messenger to all creation.
 
The Lord did speak face to face with Moses.

How did God speak to Jeremiah? Isaiah? All the Prophets? Did He speak face to face with all of them like He did with Moses?
That's the point you miss.
God spoke to the prophets through visions and dreams. Thats not the point. She said that God spoke to Moses through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and that was just not true -- it was face to face.
 
God spoke to the prophets through visions and dreams. Thats not the point. She said that God spoke to Moses through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit and that was just not true -- it was face to face.
Dreams and visions by means of the Spirit. Is the Holy Spirit absent in the Torah?

King David begged that God would not remove the Holy Spirit from him.

"Cast me not away from Thy presence; and take not Thy Ruach Hakodesh from me."
Psalm 51:11
 
Dreams and visions by means of the Spirit. Is the Holy Spirit absent in the Torah?

King David begged that God would not remove the Holy Spirit from him.

"Cast me not away from Thy presence; and take not Thy Ruach Hakodesh from me." Psalm 51:11
There are three places the word Holy Spirit occurs in the Tanakh. But it means something very different for Jews than for Christians. It is not a separate person from the Father. It is rather the divine force of God.

Again, we were not talking about the prophets. We were talking about Moses, who was not "inspired" but spoken to directly.
 
I read what you said. YOu said that God spoke to MOSES through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit. Thats just not true -- it was face to face.
What is your point in all this? What does it reveal?
There are three places the word Holy Spirit occurs in the Tanakh. But it means something very different for Jews than for Christians. It is not a separate person from the Father. It is rather the divine force of God.
If you not know Jesus? You will not be able to know the Word of God as it should be known on such matters.

Do you think I was shocked to know that what the Bible says is true? I was shocked... and then given great peace about it.

You do not understand. Its not a matter of mere logic. It must include God's Spirit enabling you to understand. Then.. you to might find yourself shocked to find out its real...

No words can describe it. Christians simply look at each other and acknowledge in the other what they know unbelievers do not know.
 
What is your point in all this? What does it reveal?

If you not know Jesus? You will not be able to know the Word of God as it should be known on such matters.

Do you think I was shocked to know that what the Bible says is true? I was shocked... and then given great peace about it.

You do not understand. Its not a matter of mere logic. It must include God's Spirit enabling you to understand. Then.. you to might find yourself shocked to find out its real...

No words can describe it. Christians simply look at each other and acknowledge in the other what they know unbelievers do not know.
To say that a person cannot understand the Bible unless they know Jesus is just absurd. Those that understand the bible the best are scholars of the Bible.

You know, Mormons say the same things about the Book of Mormon that you say about the New Testament. It doesn't make them right either.
 
To say that a person cannot understand the Bible unless they know Jesus is just absurd. Those that understand the bible the best are scholars of the Bible.

You know, Mormons say the same things about the Book of Mormon that you say about the New Testament. It doesn't make them right either.
But....be that as it may? Some will be right. God causes it to be that way.

In the first place, I hear that when you come together as a church,
there are divisions among you, and to some extent I believe it.
No doubt there have to be differences among you to show which
of you have God’s approval."
1 Cor 11:18-19


This earth is God's testing ground for all souls.

Everyone is now free to seek and believe as they see fit. Those who end up seeing the Lord in their hearts will find God's approval. Approval being revealed before God and angels by what souls choose to accept to believe.


In the first place, I hear that when you come together as a church,
there are divisions among you, and to some extent I believe it.
No doubt there have to be differences among you to show which
of you have God’s approval."
1 Cor 11:18-19
 
To say that a person cannot understand the Bible unless they know Jesus is just absurd. Those that understand the bible the best are scholars of the Bible.

You know, Mormons say the same things about the Book of Mormon that you say about the New Testament. It doesn't make them right either.
They can have their own understanding of the Bible. But, without knowing Jesus they will not be able to know the Bible. History they can understand from the Bible. But, not the spiritual reality.
 
  • RAKOVSKY WROTE:
    Basically, in terms of understanding the prophetic Legacy and ancient Judaism, it does appear that Jesus fulfilled the role of the Messiah, God's anointed, as Jesus was the one to spread knowledge of the god of Israel around the world. Even Muslims consider Jesus Messiah and so as at least an indirect result of the ministry of Jesus the Muslims have come to know God of Abraham, albeit there is the argument that their knowledge is imperfect. In any case when you count the Christian and Muslim world, you are talking about most of the world's population in total considering Jesus as Messiah and recognizing the God of Abraham Isaac and Jacob.

    As a result, there are Jewish philosophers in modern times who see Jesus as specifically the Messiah to the Gentiles although they don't see him as the Jewish Messiah. If I remember correctly one of them was named Rosenzweig. I would have to look it up again to be sure to get it right.

I repeat, and I will continue to repeat, Jesus did NOT fulfill the Messianic prophecies in the Tanakh.

1. Most of the prophecies that Christians say he fulfilled are actually not prophecies at all, but are about other things, and Christians yank them out of context. This would be passages like Isaiah 53.

2. Some of the prophecies that Jesus fulfilled are fulfilled by a great many people, such as being a descendant of David.

3. The important prophecies, prophecies that only the Messiah would fulfill, Jesus did not fulfill. For example, the Messiah will usher in an era of worldwide peace between the nations. Jesus just didn't do that. And thats not the only one. I usually list three.
I don't know if I was replying to anything specific when I wrote that.
For what it's worth, my own issue or uncertainty about the Christian claim IS not over Jesus fulfilling the Tanakh prophecies. Isaiah 53 is about the Messiah as the Talmud and Targum themselves say. I admit that there is some ambiguity because Isaiah 53 does not say something like "MY SERVANT THE MESSIAH" like the Targum does. But using literary analysis and putting away one's biases leads to the conclusion that the Talmud is right that the Servant is the Messiah.

My own uncertainty, if you will, has to do with a kind of academic or modern skepticism, of the kind that I raised on another thread about the Great Flood. If you accept these accounts in the Tanakh about the Creation, the Great Flood and Noah's Ark, Moses' many miracles in the desert, Elijah raising a dead youth and Elisha's bones doing the same thing, then the idea of Jesus being born of a virgin and resurrecting is not really an issue in terms of modern academic skepticism.

That is, there is not really a problem with thinking that the Tanakh has a kind of prophetic poetic prediction about a saving Davidic figure who will suffer and be killed like other major figures like Isaiah and Samson. The sacrifice and vicarious atonement theme is pretty key in the Torah as well as the Tanakh in general, so the Nazarene/Christian understanding of the Messiah is very much in the Jewish tradition as that tradition existed in ancient times. The centrality of Temple life and sacrificial rituals does not get the same amount of attention since the Temple destruction of 70 AD. My expectation is that there has also been a kind of "counter-reaction" against Christianity by the rabbinical communities that has led to Jewish ideas emphasized in Christianity getting neglected or denied, as in the Talmudic understanding of Isaiah 53.
 
The question in the OP, "Why Jews will never accept Jesus" is not correct, because in fact over the centuries many Jews like GeneZ in this very thread have done so. So it is a "loaded question." Wikipedia says:
A loaded question or complex question is a question that contains a controversial assumption. Such questions may be used as a rhetorical tool: the question attempts to limit direct replies to be those that serve the questioner's agenda. The traditional example is the question "Have you stopped beating your wife?"

But if you reword the question in terms of "Why are there many Jews who have not accepted Jesus", then the question can inadvertently contain its own answer. Isaiah 53 says:
2 For he shall grow up before him as a tender plant, and as a root out of a dry ground: he hath no form nor comeliness; and when we shall see him, there is no beauty that we should desire him.

3 He is despised and rejected of men; a man of sorrows, and acquainted with grief: and we hid as it were our faces from him; he was despised, and we esteemed him not.

4 Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted.

5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.

6 All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and the Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.
There is this whole theology in Christianity about how the Messiah would be rejected by His people. This comes up as a theme in the New Testament where Jesus gives this reasoning that it has to have happened that the Son of Man would be rejected.

So if you are familiar with this theme, then the question answers itself. It becomes like asking: "If the Messiah is supposed to be rejected by the people, then why do many Jewish people reject Jesus?"
 
Bob, I have to insist, Christians do get frustrated about certain things.
Well - I'll give you the certain FOOLISH, and IGNORANT (any maybe only "Nominal") Christians may get "Frustrated" about this that and the other thing.
People DO get frustrated about their beliefs, and prejudices, but NOT about their FAITH.

My denomination (Assembly of God) has missionary activity world wide, and among the spiritually lost including the jewish people, and ISLAMICS, and we see many of them saved - just like other groups of spiritually lost people.

Jews aren't "Unique" in any way, when the Holy Spirit Convicts them of SIN and of Judgement and they surrender and repent, calling on God for salvation. SO there's nothing at ALL for a Born Again Christian to be frustrated about. We understand that we're only to PRESENT God's Word to the Lost, and it's Father God who Draws them to Christ. Simple as that.
 
Sorry for the late reply. I've been putting off answering some things on here.

I find it surprising that you would question the reliability of the Tanach. Aren't you Christian?

In any case, I think the Tanach is reliable, but the meaning of that reliability is fluid and is bound to change from person to person. I personally would say that first and foremost, I believe in Tanach out of faith in my religion, which includes an unbroken tradition in the validity of the Tanach. Secondly, as time moves on, more and more archeological discoveries are being found that further validate the Tanach. Not everything has been found yet, but I think we're slowly but soundly heading in a positive direction. Thirdly, some of the Tanachic prophecies have already been fulfilled.

Here's why I think the meaning of that reliability is fluid. In my opinion, Jesus didn't fulfill any Tanachic prophecies. A Christian, on the other hand, would say that he did, in fact, fulfill many, and that's a basis for belief in the truth of the prophecies of the Tanach. A minimalist person in Biblical archeological terms would claim that multiple archeological discoveries actually show that the Tanach is entirely or almost entirely unreliable. Such a person could still be religious. For example, Werner Keller, who wrote The Bible As History, was a Christian pastor but was clearly minimalistic in his views. Some random examples: He thought that David wasn't the name of King David but was a later misinterpretation of an ancient Mesopotamian tribal leadership title, the "davidum", and he thought that Manna wasn't literally miracle foodstuff from heaven but a kind of sweet plant. So Keller's and other religious minimalists' views on the Tanach would be that it's either much more symbolical than viewed by most or that we simply don't have enough understanding of the Biblical lingo to correctly interpret that when they say X, they actually mean Y.
Harel,
To answer your question, I am Christian because I consider that Jesus was God's Christ, God's Anointed. But beyond that, Christians themselves question the reliability of the Bible on major topics, starting with the Creation story, the Great Flood, and Moses' miracles.

You are saying that the Bible's reliability is fluid. To explain this, you give a few examples:
(1) Christians have a basis for believing that the Tanakh is true, because they believe that Jesus fulfilled them. However, you believe that Jesus did not fulfill them. The logical implication then is not that Christians' basis is real, but mistaken. So based on what you are saying, Christians do not have a reliable basis for treating the Bible as reliable.
(2) You give the example of W. Keller as being a minimalist who sees the Tanakh as almostly wholly unreliable. You give an example where he sees the Manna as being a sweet plant, so that the Tanakh passages like these are either symbolic or we don't have enough understanding to interpret it. In these two examples, the Tanakh doesn't actually appear to be "fluid" in its reliability, but just not reliable.

You are saying that the "meaning" of the reliability changes between people. In the case of Christians, sure there are some who would say that it's only reliable on some things like Jesus' resurrection and not on others, like on the manna from heaven being supernatural. If we go with the latter minimalist approach, then like you said about example #2 above, their idea just seems to be that it's frequently not reliable when it describes extreme supernatural events.

But getting back to what you said earlier in your reply, you said that first, you see it as reliable because your religion has a tradition of Tanakh being reliable. However, since the Tanakh is the central book in Judaism, this reasoning seems rather like circular reasoning, as in: "I see my religion's holy book as reliable because my religion sees it as reliable." It then begs question like why should someone see their religion's book as reliable. I don't want to give you a hard time about it, because I actually would like the Tanakh's inspiring predictions to be real as well.

You also said that some archeological discoveries support the Tanakh's reliability and that some prophecies have been fulfilled. But then with this you have the issue of archeological issues conflicting with the Creation Story and Great Flood story.

Plus, there is the issue of whether some prophecies were contradicted by real events. I guess that due to the partly ambiguous quality of prophecies, it would be hard to prove that a prophecy was "disproven" though. For instance, there is a debate over whether a prophecy about Egypt's conquest was contradicted by real events. Here is an article on that debate:
"Dissonant Prophecy in Ezekiel 26 and 29", by Dean Ulrich:
Ezek 26:1–21 and 29:17–21 present a formidable challenge to the deuteronomic criterion for a true prophet. In the former passage Ezekiel predicted that Nebuchadnezzar's army would conquer Tyre and plunder its wealth. In the latter passage, written 16 years later, Ezekiel admitted that Nebuchadnezzar's army obtained no plunder from its campaign against Tyre. He issued a corrective prophecy that promised Egyptian booty as a consolation. For the most part scholarship has considered the historical problem the key to the first prophecy. Whereas some interpreters appeal to multiple historical fulfillments, others allow the evidence to impugn Ezekiel's integrity. By appealing to the function of mythological imagery in Ezekiel's oracles against the nations, this article proposes an alternate approach to the impasse.
So I think that it would be hard to try to "disprove" a prophecy. For instance, someone could argue that God changed His mind as in the case of the story of Jonah's prophecy against Nineveh.
 
The question in the OP, "Why Jews will never accept Jesus" is not correct, because in fact over the centuries many Jews like GeneZ in this very thread have done so. So it is a "loaded question." Wikipedia says:


But if you reword the question in terms of "Why are there many Jews who have not accepted Jesus", then the question can inadvertently contain its own answer. Isaiah 53 says:

There is this whole theology in Christianity about how the Messiah would be rejected by His people. This comes up as a theme in the New Testament where Jesus gives this reasoning that it has to have happened that the Son of Man would be rejected.

So if you are familiar with this theme, then the question answers itself. It becomes like asking: "If the Messiah is supposed to be rejected by the people, then why do many Jewish people reject Jesus?"
Two points.

First, Isaiah 53 is not about the Messiah, but about Israel. The servant metaphor is used throughout the book of Isaiah, and is identified as follows:
Isaiah 41:8
But you, Israel, my servant, Jacob, whom I have chosen, you descendants of Abraham my friend,

So basically, there is nothing to say that the messiah is supposed to be rejected by people.

Secondly, while there are occasional converts among Jews, in general the Christian gospel just doesn't make inroad into the Jewish community. I mean, look, you have converted all of Europe, the Americas, Australia, and your missionary efforts are now paying off in Africa and Asia. But STILL Jews are not leaving Judaism for the church, despite obvious efforts on the part of Christians to "reach" us.
 
Two points.

First, Isaiah 53 is not about the Messiah, but about Israel. The servant metaphor is used throughout the book of Isaiah, and is identified as follows:
Isaiah 41:8
But you, Israel, my servant, Jacob, whom I have chosen, you descendants of Abraham my friend,

So basically, there is nothing to say that the messiah is supposed to be rejected by people.
Lol.....
Yeah...anybody reading Isaiah 53 can see it's talking about a whole nation of people. ?

Isaiah 53:
1 Who has believed our report?
And to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?
2 For He shall grow up before Him as a tender plant,
And as a root out of dry ground.
He has no form or comeliness;
And when we see Him,
There is no beauty that we should desire Him.
3 He is despised and rejected by men,
A Man of sorrows and acquainted with grief.
And we hid, as it were, our faces from Him;
He was despised, and we did not esteem Him.
4 Surely He has borne our griefs
And carried our sorrows;
Yet we esteemed Him stricken,
Smitten by God, and afflicted.
5 But He was wounded for our transgressions,
He was bruised for our iniquities;
The chastisement for our peace was upon Him,
And by His stripes we are healed.
6 All we like sheep have gone astray;
We have turned, every one, to his own way;
And the Lord has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.
7 He was oppressed and He was afflicted,
Yet He opened not His mouth;
He was led as a lamb to the slaughter,
And as a sheep before its shearers is silent,
So He opened not His mouth.
8 He was taken from prison and from judgment,
And who will declare His generation?
For He was cut off from the land of the living;
For the transgressions of My people He was stricken.
9 And they made His grave with the wicked—
But with the rich at His death,
Because He had done no violence,
Nor was any deceit in His mouth.
10 Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise Him;
He has put Him to grief.
When You make His soul an offering for sin,
He shall see His seed, He shall prolong His days,
And the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in His hand.
11 He shall see the labor of His soul, and be satisfied.
By His knowledge My righteous Servant shall justify many,
For He shall bear their iniquities.
12 Therefore I will divide Him a portion with the great,
And He shall divide the spoil with the strong,
Because He poured out His soul unto death,
And He was numbered with the transgressors,
And He bore the sin of many,
And made intercession for the transgressors.
 
The OP reads....

Why Jews will never accept Jesus?


Well? Its for the same reason gentiles will never accept Jesus.

The only difference is the arsenal of excuses used.


No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws them,
and I will raise him up on the Last Day."
John 6:44


God draws all men as seen in Romans 1:18-22 .

Romans 1:18-22 shows how even the most perverted amongst us in society, at one time God attempted to draw.



The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and
wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what
may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to
them.
For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power
and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been
made,
so that people are without excuse.

For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks
to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened.
Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools."
Romans 1:18-22


Its how they rejected God's drawing. With a barricade of lies against reality. Lies of their own making. Just like we see today with secularism.

People will be drawn by God for different lengths of time, depending upon when that soul wants to call it quits. For many will continue being drawn until they end up accepting God's conditioning them into a moral sense of decency. As seen in the following passage..


For the grace of God has appeared that offers salvation to all people.
It teaches us to say “No” to ungodliness and worldly passions, and to
live self-controlled, upright and godly lives in this present age."
Titus 2:11-12


The more moral some unbeliever becomes means that God was able to keep drawing that person longer than those found in Romans 1:18-22. But unfortunately many of these moral citizens end up making their morality into their self righteousness. An unfounded self respect that resists the further drawing of God unto actual salvation.


So? Why Jews will never accept Jesus?


Because they have their own set of excuses.

As Gentiles never accept Jesus for their own reasons.


Sadly.. just like many Christians never accept what's required for achieving God's will for their lives, by the means of barricading themselves behind walls of wood, hay, and stubble of false doctrines. Teachings that they prefer over God's will for their lives.


grace and peace.......
 
Last edited:
Two points.

First, Isaiah 53 is not about the Messiah, but about Israel. The servant metaphor is used throughout the book of Isaiah, and is identified as follows:
Isaiah 41:8
But you, Israel, my servant, Jacob, whom I have chosen, you descendants of Abraham my friend,

So basically, there is nothing to say that the messiah is supposed to be rejected by people.

Secondly, while there are occasional converts among Jews, in general the Christian gospel just doesn't make inroad into the Jewish community. I mean, look, you have converted all of Europe, the Americas, Australia, and your missionary efforts are now paying off in Africa and Asia. But STILL Jews are not leaving Judaism for the church, despite obvious efforts on the part of Christians to "reach" us.
Isaiah 41 can be about Israelites descended from Jacob, but in Isaiah 49, the "Servant" switches identity away from the Israelites, because in Isaiah 49, God says that it's this other Servant's job to gather the Israelite tribes, thus creating a distinction: "now, saith the Lord that formed me from the womb to be his servant, to bring Jacob again to him"
Bringing Jacob to God is a Messianic task.

Then God says:
It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth.

This grammatically separates the identity of the Servant from the tribes of Israel and the remnant of Israel.

If the Servant's task is to restore the perserved of Israel and accomplish other Messianic tasks, it means grammatically that the Servant is not the same as Israel's preserved.

Isaiah 53 comes after Isaiah 49, so Isaiah 53 is about the Servant after the Servant's identity switched to being about the Messiah.

I gave a lot more reasons like this on my website, rakovskii.livejournal.com
 
Back
Top