Why Jews will never accept Jesus

[Newbirth]

You have one story of one Christian being martyred by Jews.

really? Is it your contention that the Jews accepted the followers of Jesus? Is it your contention that the Jews killed only one follower of Jesus?

We have a 2000 year long history of Jews being oppressed, tortured, and killed by Christians. I'm just rolling my eyes.

So-called Christians...The followers of Jesus do not kill anyone. Jews by nature have been bred to kill. Go read the Torah. Start with Joshua and Caleb...

Abraham started off as a non-Jew, but he became the very first Hebrew = Jew.

When? If the Jewish religion started with Moses when did Abraham become a Jew?

So you believe that Paul DID teach against circumcision and the Law.

No, He taught apart from circumcision and the law... the agreement of the law is the promise to keep all the law...Do you do that...?

That is a VILE thing for him to do, to teach Jews to break their covenant with Hashem.

Are you saying that Jews keep all the laws without breaking any?

I gave an EXAMPLE. You know what an example is, don't you?

There is no example in the law, the agreement the Jews make with God is that they will keep all his commands. They don't, they always fail at some point...

 

[Newbirth]

Where does it say Pilate blamed the Jews? I missed that. It says Pilate condemned Jesus to the cross.

At the suggestion of the Jews...Read it slowly...And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among us, had condemned him to the cross;

 

[Newbirth]

You're complaining about the gnat and swallowing the camel. Wow!

Am I wrong about this....Jews have to keep all the laws, not just the sabbath ...that is the covenant they agreed to...?

 

[Jewjitzu]

At the suggestion of the Jews...Read it slowly...And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among us, had condemned him to the cross;

Read slowly... Pilate condemned him. Pilate had the power.

 

[Jewjitzu]

Am I wrong about this....Jews have to keep all the laws, not just the sabbath ...that is the covenant they agreed to...?

Open Heart didn't say anything differently. So why did you reply with a ridiculous response?

 

[Open Heart]

you are funny...you are saying...
And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among us, had condemned him to the cross;
Do you see it now? at the suggestion of the principal men among us....
Does not say...
And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among us, had condemned him to the cross;
Do you see it now? at the suggestion of the principal men among us.

Taking a suggesting is a voluntary thing. The point is who condemned Jesus.

 

[Jewjitzu]

sir your claim was " The point is that Islam and Christianity bases itself on a revelation to mankind that only Israel experienced." I am pointing out that Ishmael the father of Islam lived and died before Israel receiver the Law...

And how does this help you? Abraham received the covenant first before Ishmael.

And Christianity is based on God's promise to the gentiles...you do know that Abraham was a gentile don't you?

The only promise to gentiles was given to Noah not to flood the world again and the sign of the rainbow.

Abraham's promise was that the world would be blessed through his descendants, Israel. The law was given at Mt. Sinai. One law for the native and stranger.

Christianity has nothing to do with the promise.

The promise was made to a gentile Abraham

Yes, and his descendants.

There is no mistake...you don't seem to understand that Abraham was not an Israelite...

Yes, but his descendants were. And they've blessed the world.

Again, you made a dunce of a mistake again. Reread Genesis 22:17-18. The seed are like stars in the sky, Israel. Rotfl...

Yes, I do but I am not nor ever was in a covenant to keep all the laws therein. You do know what a covenant is, don't you?

Do you keep Acts 15.

therefore it is just your claim.

And a good one.

, no it is not I just proved otherwise...You have not shown how Following the Messiah is dependant on the Jewish religion...

Judaism isn't based on following a man, but God. So you can create your own religion without a basis in Tanakh, and you have.

Following a monotheistic God is based on Judaism, as well as the ideas of moral laws and covenants.

The Jews have it and did not know the Messiah came to them...

Which he hasn't.

they are used to show the history, why should I remove them...

Because is was written by Jews.

what are you talking about?

Remove from the bible what was written by Jews.

yes it is a fact it is your choice

Its a fact. Not a choice. The NT is not needed. You need the Tanakh. This is so funny.

Everybody does...it is a choice

See above.

yep...sad to see you didn't choose

I'm glad I didn't. It was easy. Why settle for 2nd place?

 

[Open Heart]

really? Is it your contention that the Jews accepted the followers of Jesus? Is it your contention that the Jews killed only one follower of Jesus?

Nothing the Jews did to Chrisitans compare to the 2000 years of persecution and mass murders of Jews by Chrisitans.

So-called Christians...The followers of Jesus do not kill anyone.

You need to look of the fallacy "No true Scotsman." Your argument is utterly without merit.

Jews by nature have been bred to kill. Go read the Torah. Start with Joshua and Caleb...Wow

Wow, such anti-semitism, such vile hatred. You will stand before God some day.

When? If the Jewish religion started with Moses when did Abraham become a Jew?

The Jewish "religion" is actually simply our covenant with God. It began with Abraham, and continued with Moses.

No, He taught apart from circumcision and the law... the agreement of the law is the promise to keep all the law...Do you do that...?

Are you saying that Jews keep all the laws without breaking any?

The standard has never been perfection. Paul got it wrong.

And what does this have to do with answering my charge that it was vile for Paul to teach Jews to stop obeying God?

There is no example in the law, the agreement the Jews make with God is that they will keep all his commands. They don't, they always fail at some point...

Again, the standard is not perfection.

 

[Jewjitzu]

Taking a suggesting is a voluntary thing. The point is who condemned Jesus.

Exactly. It says Pilate did it.

 

[Jewjitzu]

There is no example in the law, the agreement the Jews make with God is that they will keep all his commands. They don't, they always fail at some point...

So, what's your excuse for Jesus and Paul?

 

[En Hakkore]

But, we find other parenthetical comments I believe in other places of scripture. So, why is this one not to be accepted as something that Jesus taught his disciples?

Parenthetical comments are, by definition, asides of the writer... they express what an author (or in this case perhaps a later scribe copying the text) thinks, not what the character in the story thinks, much less what the historical figure behind him taught or did.

I believe it does.

You are welcome to belief, but I've seen no detailed counter argument to what I posted in rebuttal.

There are several versions of the idea in Mark 7:19 in the other gospels.

You are the one making the claim that Jesus abrogated the Jewish dietary laws so the burden of proof is on you to bring the evidence for that to the discussion. If you have any other evidence, cite it specifically and we'll explore it... otherwise, you have not met an acceptable standard of proof for your position and you should consider seriously the alternative

Why would the lineage of Jesus be in Luke if not to convince Jews?

Luke understands Jesus as the Messiah in fulfillment of the Jewish sacred texts... references to these and characters therein are to be expected, regardless of who the intended audience was. Chief among them, I would point out, are Gentiles already familiar with and sympathetic to Jewish traditions... that is, the 'God fearers', and he includes a positive story of such an individual in each of his volumes (the centurion at Capernaum in the gospel and Cornelius in Acts). I would further point out that Luke, unlike Matthew, takes that genealogy back to 'Adam [son] of God' under the influence of Paul (his hero in the book of Acts) who views Jesus as a type of Adam (Rom 5:12-17; 1 Cor 15:20-22, 45-49) whose gift is for all humanity.

If this is true, then an apostates testimony is invalid as well. The references to son of God, son of man, etc., are not there to convince gentiles.

See above as it regards 'son of Man'. With respect to 'son of God', the idea of divine men was widespread in the Graeco-Roman world and would resonate with Gentile readers, far more so even than with (alleged) Jewish readers.

This is interesting as Paul talks about gentiles being grafted to Israel. Why be grafted to apostates? An apostate is someone that abrogates the law, teaches a false god or follows one, or no God at all. That wouldn't apply to non-believers in Jesus.

The comments to which you responded concerned Matthew, not Paul, whose allegory of the olive tree and branches is unique within the New Testament (Rom 11:17-24). One cannot draw these two writers into dialogue with each other without a good argument for doing so... as it stands, they represent two radically different 'gospels' and Paul aims harsh words at those who espouse the kind of Torah-observant 'gospel' that Matthew does (see Galatians). Even if one were to allow for Paul's allegory to find a place in Matthew's thought, I already noted that Matthew considers true Israel to be Christ-believing Jews; the apostates (ie. those Jews who reject Jesus as the Messiah) would be the branches snapped off, not the nourishing root to which the wild (ie. Gentile) branches are grafted.

And Isaiah 56:1-8 shows how a gentile becomes a true Jew. One law for the native and stranger.

This is precisely the model that Matthew has in mind... he and his community are Torah-observant Jews who accept Jesus as the Messiah and they expect any Gentiles who want to be a part of Israel to do so on the basis of embracing the covenant and its requirements. This is obviously not the model Paul embraces...

Then you can't expect Jews to follow Jesus based on the gospels. I'm not trying to slight or offend you, it's just the natural reaction to what you've said above.

I've never expressed such expectations, nor am I here in any proselytizing capacity. My interjection was to challenge a point on which I believe you are factually incorrect... as for what people want to believe theologically (or not), I could care less so long as they don't harm anyone with those beliefs and concomitant practices.

Kind regards,
Jonathan

 

[Newbirth]

Taking a suggesting is a voluntary thing. The point is who condemned Jesus.

without the suggestion, there would be no condemnation...You already conceded that the Jews had a part to play...They accused Jesus and suggested the punishment...You are arguing like a Trumpist...suggesting people go to the capitol building to "stop the steal" means that he is responsible for people going to the capitol building to "stop the steal".

 

[Newbirth]

Exactly. It says Pilate did it.

If you accuse someone wrongfully, have them arrested, and put them before the court, are you saying that the court is to be blamed?

 

[Newbirth]

So, what's your excuse for Jesus and Paul?

What is your excuse? You seem overly concerned about Jesus and Paul...Why do you not keep all the law without breaking any?

 

[Newbirth]

Nothing the Jews did to Chrisitans compare to the 2000 years of persecution and mass murders of Jews by Chrisitans.

Jews killed the followers of Jesus...You have to differentiate between the followers of Jesus and those you call "Christians"...Jesus did not call anyone to be a "Christian" or to kill anyone... Those you call "Christians" are pseudo followers of Jesus. Those "Christians" are responsible for the slaughter of Jews. On the other hand, Jews are notably prone to killing...read the Torah.

You need to look of the fallacy "No true Scotsman." Your argument is utterly without merit.

You need to look at your argument...You are saying Jews killing the followers of Jesus is nothing...but followers of Jesus being blamed for killing Jews is something...Jesus did not teach anyone to kill. Anyone who kills another human is not following Jesus..

Wow, such anti-semitism, such vile hatred.

It is in the Torah. You pretending to be blind and playing the victim is not going to cut it.
Num21
1 And when king Arad the Canaanite, which dwelt in the south, heard tell that Israel came by the way of the spies; then he fought against Israel, and took some of them prisoners.
2 And Israel vowed a vow unto the Lord, and said, If thou wilt indeed deliver this people into my hand, then I will utterly destroy their cities.
3 And the Lord hearkened to the voice of Israel, and delivered up the Canaanites; and they utterly destroyed them and their cities: and he called the name of the place Hormah.

You will stand before God some day.

We all will... Do you deny Israel swearing to destroy a people and their cities?

The Jewish "religion" is actually simply our covenant with God.

Yes to keep all his commands....have you kept all God's commands without breaking any? Because you are breaking them on this forum..

It began with Abraham, and continued with Moses.

Nope the covenant with the law between Israel and God began with Moses...This is the pledge...Deut 27:26 Cursed be he that confirmeth not all the words of this law to do them. And all the people shall say, Amen. A covenant is an agreement ...What is the agreement you made with God?

The standard has never been perfection. Paul got it wrong.

Are you saying that God wants an imperfect people?
Deuteronomy 18:13
Thou shalt be perfect with the Lord thy God. Same word he used with Abraham...Gen 17: And when Abram was ninety years old and nine, the Lord appeared to Abram, and said unto him, I am the Almighty God; walk before me, and be thou perfect.

And what does this have to do with answering my charge that it was vile for Paul to teach Jews to stop obeying God?

Where does Paul say "stop obeying God"? You are making a false claim against Paul...

Again, the standard is not perfection.

If it is not perfection, what was the purpose of the law? Are you saying God gave the laws that they should be broken?

 

[Newbirth]

Read slowly... Pilate condemned him. Pilate had the power.

those are your words...I quoted from Josephus...And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among us, had condemned him to the cross;
You are in denial...lol...

 

[Newbirth]

And how does this help you? Abraham received the covenant first before Ishmael.

How many times do I have to explain to you people that a covenant is an agreement... You make an agreement with the promise to keep it...The agreement with Ishmael is not the same as with Abraham. The agreement with Abraham is not the same as with Moses. You have no idea what a covenant is...

The only promise to gentiles was given to Noah not to flood the world again and the sign of the rainbow.

Then you are saying God made no promise to Abraham. Because Abraham was a gentile...

Abraham's promise was that the world would be blessed through his descendants, Israel.

Therefore Abraham was a Gentile...not a Jew...not a descendant of Israel

The law was given at Mt. Sinai. One law for the native and stranger.

the law was given to the Children of Israel...the law does not make a stranger an Israelite...What is your point here?

Christianity has nothing to do with the promise.

the Messiah does...

Yes, and his descendants.

Genesis 22:18
And in thy seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed; because thou hast obeyed my voice.

Yes, but his descendants were. And they've blessed the world.

When and where have the Jews as a nation blessed the world...?https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/02/world/middleeast/israel-migrants-african.html
Ask the Palestinians if the Jews have been a blessing to them.

Again, you made a dunce of a mistake again. Reread Genesis 22:17-18. The seed are like stars in the sky, Israel. Rotfl...

No, I didn't...you cannot use the same argument to mean seed as a nation and seed as one person from the loins of Abraham for the messiah....So which is it ? Does the messiah come from the seed of Abraham...Or is Israel the nation the Messiah?
Isaiah 42:1
Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles.

Isaiah 11:10
And in that day there shall be a root of Jesse, which shall stand for an ensign of the people; to it shall the Gentiles seek: and his rest shall be glorious.
Isaiah 42:6
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;
Who is the person God is giving for a covenant /agreement in Isaiah 49:8 Thus saith the Lord, In an acceptable time have I heard thee, and in a day of salvation have I helped thee: and I will preserve thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, to establish the earth, to cause to inherit the desolate heritages;

Do you keep Acts 15.

10 Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?

And a good one.

nope...

Judaism isn't based on following a man, but God.

Moses...did God appear to you personally and give you a law? If not you follow what Moses say...

So you can create your own religion without a basis in Tanakh, and you have.

and Tanakh is based on Moses writings

Following a monotheistic God is based on Judaism, as well as the ideas of moral laws and covenants.

No, it is based on Abraham... Islam believes in one God...Ishmael was before Israel...

Which he hasn't.

Then you are waiting for his appearance...what is the sign of his coming?
Daniel 9:25
Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.
26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

please explain to me what sanctuary Daniel is talking about that will be destroyed

Because is was written by Jews.

That is not a valid reason...The NT was also written by Jews

Remove from the bible what was written by Jews.

That does not solve your dilemma...The NT was written by Jews

Its a fact. Not a choice. The NT is not needed. You need the Tanakh. This is so funny.

The NT is about...this person who the nation of Israel abhorreth...
Isa 49
7 Thus saith the Lord, the Redeemer of Israel, and his Holy One, to him whom man despiseth, to him whom the nation abhorreth, to a servant of rulers, Kings shall see and arise, princes also shall worship, because of the Lord that is faithful, and the Holy One of Israel, and he shall choose thee.
8 Thus saith the Lord, In an acceptable time have I heard thee, and in a day of salvation have I helped thee: and I will preserve thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, to establish the earth, to cause to inherit the desolate heritages;
9 That thou mayest say to the prisoners, Go forth; to them that are in darkness, Shew yourselves. They shall feed in the ways, and their pastures shall be in all high places.

See above.

So where is your messiah? is he late in coming...where is the sanctuary that will be destroyed?

I'm glad I didn't. It was easy. Why settle for 2nd place?

proverbs 16
5 Every one that is proud in heart is an abomination to the Lord: though hand join in hand, he shall not be unpunished.

 

[Newbirth]

Open Heart didn't say anything differently. So why did you reply with a ridiculous response?

she says the standard is not perfection I am saying it is...do you agree with her...? Does God want you to be perfect or imperfect? Are you required to Keep all the law and be perfect or break some of the laws and be perfect...

 

[Open Heart]

without the suggestion, there would be no condemnation...You already conceded that the Jews had a part to play...They accused Jesus and suggested the punishment...You are arguing like a Trumpist...suggesting people go to the capitol building to "stop the steal" means that he is responsible for people going to the capitol building to "stop the steal".

This is just illogical reasoning. The district attorney can bring charges against a person and suggest to the judge and/or jury that the guy is guilty along with evidence. But ultimately the jury is responsible for the verdict, and the judge for the sentence.

 

[Open Heart]

those are your words...I quoted from Josephus...And when Pilate, at the suggestion of the principal men among us, had condemned him to the cross;
You are in denial...lol...

I will no longer reply to posts where you shout at me. If you want to dialogue with me, you will have to treat me respectfully.