Why Jews will never accept Jesus

[Jewjitzu]

They did the whole Old Testament, it was in Alexandria, Egypt. That's the version the gospels

No, that would be the first 5 books only. Since you trust the Jewish sources, Megillah 9a spells that out for you.

You still don't understand Christianity. The benefits apply to anyone under the New Covenant.

The new covenant applies to Israel only, Jeremiah 31:31-34. I don't think you understand.

The one God said He was going to make (Jeremiah 32:40, Isiah 55:3, which He did through Jesus.

Neither of these verses apply to anyone outside of Israel. Focus on the context.

No one could ever be saved by obeying the law, that's why God had to instigate the tabernacle services.

The means for atonement are in the law, so you're wrong here.

Sins can only be removed by blood sacrifice.

That is false. Blood is one means of atonement. How do you think Daniel obtained atonement while the 1st temple was destroyed?

He never changed that provision and that is why Jesus came to fulfill that requirement, He is the last, permanent sacrifice for the removal of sin.

That is false since sacrifices continued even after his death and reconstituted in Jeremiah 33:14-36, Ezekiel 37-45, etc.

If you think you can attain perfection by your own efforts and attempts to keep the law then you are mistaken. The only one who did that was Jesus. He had no sin, He became sin of us.

He was a sinner. He died defiled.

That's why He was "defiled" on the cross. Read Isaiah 53 again, His soul was made an offering for sin.

Then was defiled by contact with the dead and requires cleansing from sin Numbers 19.

Jesus used the serpent on the pole Moses made in the wilderness to illustrate the principle of His own sacrifice and defilement with our sins. The serpent on the pole that Moses lifted up for the people to look at and be healed represented the sins that Jesus would take upon Himself. As Isaiah said, "with His stripes we are healed." That illustration is another one of the typologies that God built into His word for people to find that support the principle behind the New Covenant. Those who are truly seeking will find it.

See above.

 

[Biblican]

So then I've proven you wrong. Rashi had a credible opinion.

Rashi's "opinion" was considered stretched and far fetched by his peers. He was going completely against the standard and correct interpretation. He ignored the verse that states specifically that it was Isaiah's people that were being redeemed by one individual in verse 8.
An opinion is not sound Bible exegesis.

 

[Jewjitzu]

Do some research and you will find that it's in the MIdrash, the concept of two messiahs. Its not talking about priests, kings etc. in general. There's a book I just learned about I haven't read it yet, but it may be of interest to you. It's by Riso Santala called The Messiah in the New Testament in the Light of Rabbinical writings. I will get it for my birthday.

Great. I know what's in the Midrash. It doesn't mention a 2nd coming, right?

The support for Zechariah 14 being the second coming is there if all the scriptures concerning the messiah are taken into consideration. You have to coordinate.

You have nothing.

 

[Jewjitzu]

Rashi's "opinion" was considered stretched and far fetched by his peers. He was going completely against the standard and correct interpretation. He ignored the verse that states specifically that it was Isaiah's people that were being redeemed by one individual in verse 8.
An opinion is not sound Bible exegesis.

I showed you otherwise with the Midrash and Zephaniah. You're forgetting that fact.

 

[Jewjitzu]

Holiness has to be internal. The law is fulfilled as we are made into new creatures by the Holy Spirit. The point is we cannot be justified by keeping the law, we are blessed by obeying God's word for our health, welfare and the benefit of others. The religious leaders of Jesus' day, thought they were keeping the law, but they were not in God's eyes as they were a mess inside, no love no compassion. In other words they lacked the qualities that God would find acceptable.

You say this, and yet you want yo be justified by Jesus keeping the law. Do you see the contradiction? You're not even under the law so it doesn't apply to you.

Yes the New covenant was made for Israel, it was to be given to the Jews first and then the Gentiles. The Jews rejected it for the most part.
I have already joined, you need to.

Nope, only to Israel, Jeremiah 31:31-34. You better join.

 

[Biblican]

No, that would be the first 5 books only. Since you trust the Jewish sources, Megillah 9a spells that out for you.


The new covenant applies to Israel only, Jeremiah 31:31-34. I don't think you understand.


Neither of these verses apply to anyone outside of Israel. Focus on the context.


The means for atonement are in the law, so you're wrong here.


That is false. Blood is one means of atonement. How do you think Daniel obtained atonement while the 1st temple was destroyed?


That is false since sacrifices continued even after his death and reconstituted in Jeremiah 33:14-36, Ezekiel 37-45, etc.


He was a sinner. He died defiled.


Then was defiled by contact with the dead and requires cleansing from sin Numbers 19.


See above.

The New Covenant was given to Israel first and is intended for everyone who comes to God through that Covenant which was instigated by Jesus' sacrifice, see Isaiah 53.
The Jews in Alexandria did the whole Old Testament there may have been other Jews that only did Moses' books, but the New Testament is taken from the version that was done in Alexandria, and they translated Almah as virgin.
Blood is the only means of atonement. God said the blood make atonement for the soul and He never changed that provision. Anyone who was forgiven under the Old Covenant was based on the future sacrifice of the Messiah. They did not go to heaven. According to the Jews and Jesus confirms this in His parables, righteous people who died went to paradise which was a separate place apartfrom hell, not God's domain. After Jesus died He went there and gave them the gospel and their souls were released. No one can be saved without sacrifice as illustrated for us in Eden. If we could be saved by keeping the law, then God would never have had to give Moses the tabernacle where the sacrifice were made. Again, they were only intended to be a foreshadow of Jesus' sacrifice.
Jesus died taking our sins upon Himself. He never sinned. If God touched a dead body would He be defiled? Of course not and neither would the Son of God who had God's life in Himself (John 5:26).

 

[Biblican]

I showed you otherwise with the Midrash and Zephaniah. You're forgetting that fact

I showed you otherwise by quotes from Rashi's peers. The Messiah was always considered to be a suffering servant. Rashi was not a competent scholar.

 

[Biblican]

You say this, and yet you want yo be justified by Jesus keeping the law. Do you see the contradiction? You're not even under the law so it doesn't apply to you.


Nope, only to Israel, Jeremiah 31:31-34. You better join.

I'm justified by Jesus' sacrifice which instigated the New Covenant. He qualified to be the perfect sacrifice, an unblemished Passover lamb.
The New Covenant Jeremiah and Isaiah are talking about is the New One that was made by Jesus' sacrifice. You'd better join.
Jeremiah and Isaiah are talking about a New Covenant that God would make with Israel in the future. At what specific time was this covenant instigated?

 

[Biblican]

Great. I know what's in the Midrash. It doesn't mention a 2nd coming, right?


You have nothing.

You know what's in the Midrash? You said it was a big book and acted like you didn't know what's inside it and now you do?
I have everything.

 

[Jewjitzu]

The New Covenant was given to Israel first and is intended for everyone who comes to God through that Covenant which was instigated by Jesus' sacrifice, see Isaiah 53.
The Jews in Alexandria did the whole Old Testament there may have been other Jews that only did Moses' books, but the New Testament is taken from the version that was done in Alexandria, and they translated Almah as virgin.
Blood is the only means of atonement. God said the blood make atonement for the soul and He never changed that provision. Anyone who was forgiven under the Old Covenant was based on the future sacrifice of the Messiah. They did not go to heaven. According to the Jews and Jesus confirms this in His parables, righteous people who died went to paradise which was a separate place apartfrom hell, not God's domain. After Jesus died He went there and gave them the gospel and their souls were released. No one can be saved without sacrifice as illustrated for us in Eden. If we could be saved by keeping the law, then God would never have had to give Moses the tabernacle where the sacrifice were made. Again, they were only intended to be a foreshadow of Jesus' sacrifice.
Jesus died taking our sins upon Himself. He never sinned. If God touched a dead body would He be defiled? Of course not and neither would the Son of God who had God's life in Himself (John 5:26).

You need to join per Isaiah 56:1-8. One law for native and stranger.

 

[Jewjitzu]

You know what's in the Midrash? You said it was a big book and acted like you didn't know what's inside it and now you do?

It is vast. I don't have a copy to everything. What's wrong? I gave you the reference already and you don't like it?

So, please reference the 2nd coming from the Midrash.

I have everything.

Well, you missed this point, didn't you? Why hide my points if you have everything?

And since you have everything, then it shouldn't be hard for you to give actual references when you make a claim. Right?

 

[Jewjitzu]

I'm justified by Jesus' sacrifice which instigated the New Covenant. He qualified to be the perfect sacrifice, an unblemished Passover lamb.
The New Covenant Jeremiah and Isaiah are talking about is the New One that was made by Jesus' sacrifice. You'd better join.
Jeremiah and Isaiah are talking about a New Covenant that God would make with Israel in the future. At what specific time was this covenant instigated?

Nope, Jeremiah 31:31-34 shoots you down.

Show me where Jesus says you are justified through him? It's nowhere.

 

[Jewjitzu]

I showed you otherwise by quotes from Rashi's peers. The Messiah was always considered to be a suffering servant. Rashi was not a competent scholar.

And I countered with the Midrash and the prophet Zephaniah. Israel is a suffering servant too.

 

[Open Heart]

It is if you can objectively evaluate the material outside of your programming.

My programming? You forget that I was a Christian for most of my life. My "programming" was the same as yours.

 

[Open Heart]

The Jews think there are two messiahs one that is killed and one that rules because they can't correlate the scriotures that show that Jesus does both. Zechariah 14 is the second coming.
Yes they are.

Why do you keep repeating things you know aren't true?

 

[Biblican]

You need to join per Isaiah 56:1-8. One law for native and stranger.

I've already joined the New Covenant, that's the one that is described in Isaiah 53 which you keep demonstrating you don't understand.

It is vast. I don't have a copy to everything. What's wrong? I gave you the reference already and you don't like it?

So, please reference the 2nd coming from the Midrash.


Well, you missed this point, didn't you? Why hide my points if you have everything?

And since you have everything, then it shouldn't be hard for you to give actual references when you make a claim. Right?

It shouldn't be hard for you to do your own research. You search the Midrash and see if there are any references to the second coming. How long will it take you to read second Chronicles? I always require my students to do their own research. If they find it on their own, then they won't be arguing with me whether it's true or not.

And I countered with the Midrash and the prophet Zephaniah. Israel is a suffering servant too.

Yes, Israel is a servant too, but Isaiah 53 is not about Israel. It's about the suffering messiah who redeems Isaiah's people Israel for her sins Isaiah 53:8.

 

[Biblican]

Scripture shows there are several anointed. The Hebrew term mashiach is applied to priests, kings, altars, prophets, and Israel.

So, it shouldn't be surprising that there are two or more anointed.

You have no support in Zechariah 14 for a 2nd coming.

Yes, but there is only one Redeemer according to the early Jews. The concept of two messiahs is a relatively modern invention.
There is lots of support for Zechariah being a second coming, but again, all the scriptures have to be coordinated.

 

[Biblican]

Not if he's to lead them to the law he hasnt.


Yep, and that would be specific to Israel and Judah, Jeremiah 31:31-34. You can join, Isaiah 56:1-8.


Then you better join.

He’s led them to the law. The old covenant scriptures were the only scriptures in use. Paul tells Timothy to read them so that he would be furnished in righteousness. Except we understand that some of those laws were just for the Jews that were following Moses. Like, we don’t stone our teenagers to death if they rebel.

The New Everlasting Covenant was for everybody. The Jews first, they rejected it as the Lord knew they would then He brought it to the Gentiles and they received it.

I have joined the New Covenant. You need to join it or your soul is going to be stuck in the ground like Adam. A soul cannot ascend into heaven unless it has been unified with the Holy Spirit. If the New Testament, or covenant was wrong, then our sovereign God would never have allowed it to be joined to the Old Covenant in the Bibles.

 

[Biblican]

No, that would be the first 5 books only. Since you trust the Jewish sources, Megillah 9a spells that out for you.


The new covenant applies to Israel only, Jeremiah 31:31-34. I don't think you understand.


Neither of these verses apply to anyone outside of Israel. Focus on the context.


The means for atonement are in the law, so you're wrong here.


That is false. Blood is one means of atonement. How do you think Daniel obtained atonement while the 1st temple was destroyed?


That is false since sacrifices continued even after his death and reconstituted in Jeremiah 33:14-36, Ezekiel 37-45, etc.


He was a sinner. He died defiled.


Then was defiled by contact with the dead and requires cleansing from sin Numbers 19.


See above.

You are wrong. The Greek Septuagint that is the basis for the New Covenant writers covered the entire Old Testament. It was begun during the reign of Ptolemy Lagos and was completed during the reign of Ptolemy Philadelphus. It was prepared by 72 Jews from Alexandria. There was a revision made in the 2d century, but the Bible is taken from the first version.

The New Everlasting Covenant is for everyone, it is the one made through Jesus’ sacrifice. The entire body of Old Testament prophecies, foreshadows and typologies supports it. It was given to the Jews first and intended to eventually include the Gentiles.

The means for atonement in the law is through blood sacrifice Leviticus 17:11. Because you don’t understand how God uses foreshadows you can’t see the connection between the first sacrifice in Eden and the final sacrifice in Isiah 53, that fulfills what the tabernacle services were designed to foreshadow. People were forgiven on the basis of Messiah’s sacrifice because Messiah’s sacrifice was ordained from the foundation of the world.

Sacrifices continued for a time while the gospel was being preached in Jerusalem, then to verify what the disciples were teaching, that animal sacrifices were no longer necessary, God permitted the temple to be destroyed ending the sacrifices. They were only designed to be a preparation for Messiah’s sacrifice and were no longer needed as He is the last sacrifice.

Jesus was not defiled, He became defiled when He took our sins upon us as prophesied in Isiah, He became sin for us.

Jesus is God manifest in human flesh and needed no cleansing. He healed people with His word and how do you know that the life had not returned to the body before Jesus touched it?

 

[Biblican]

I showed you otherwise with the Midrash and Zephaniah. You're forgetting that fact.

You didn’t show me anything. - In the Talmud (Sanhedrin 98b), it says, “The Rabbis said that Messiah’s name is the Suffering Scholar of Rabbi’s House (or ‘Leper scholar’). For it is written ‘Surely He has born our griefs and carried our sorrows yet we did esteem Him stricken, smitten of God and afflicted’ (Isaiah 53:4).
In a commentary on Genesis, Rabbi Moses (The Preacher, 11th century), wrote; - From the beginning God has made a covenant with the Messiah and told Him, “My righteous Messiah, those who are entrusted to you, their sins will bring you into a heavy yoke’…And He answered, ‘I gladly accept all these agonies in order that not one of Israel should be lost.’ Immediately, the Messiah accepted all agonies with love, as it is written: ‘He was oppressed and He was afflicted.” One of the Rabbis who refused to depart from the correct interpretation wisely noted; “Since Messiah bears our iniquities which produce the effect of His being bruised, it follows that whoso will not admit that the Messiah thus suffers for our iniquities, must endure and suffer for them himself” (Rabbi Elijah de Vidas (16th century) – Driver and Neubauer pg. 331).