Why Jews Don't Accept Jesus?

[Wick Stick]

Why do you suppose the Jesus depicted in the Gospel of John is anti-Semitic and calls the Jews "children of the Devil"?

He doesn't call all Jews "children of the devil," just the Pharisees/Zadokites He was talking with.

Jesus sermons in John teach that the physical nation of Israel as it was known to them was made up of a mixture of "true" Israelites and fake ones. Wheat and tares. Sheep and dogs. And He teaches that there is to be a reckoning in which the two are sorted out.

The point of the exchange in John 8, is to teach how to tell a true Israelite from a fake one. John 8:41 is the thesis statement.

Paul has it straight in Romans 9:6, as well.

Jarrod

 

[chair]

The question really is: "Why should Jews accept Jesus?"
If the answer is "because Christianity's holy book says you should", then we will ignore you.
If the answer is "because a Christian reinterpretation of the Hebrew Bible says you should"- then we get upset at how you twist our holy book.

So far I haven't seen anything at all that would make me even interested in considering "accepting Jesus".

 

[RevTestament]

Why do you suppose the Jesus depicted in the Gospel of John is anti-Semitic and calls the Jews "children of the Devil"?

Clearly, if Jesus was a Jew he wouldn't have been so schizophrenic.

It was because at the time John wrote his account--close to the year 100 or so--the early Jesus followers were getting forcibly removed from the synagogues.
They were under attack by Jews who did not accept Jesus as the long, hoped-for Messiah.

So John put that insulting speech into Jesus' mouth to show the Jews their Jesus did not agree with them.

It's just like today when Christians say Jesus doesn't like welfare or capitalism or something and they can "prove" it by what he says in the Bible.

Nope. By rejecting God's messenger and exemplar, they were rejecting the Father, and were anti-Christ. John wrote what Jesus said, and what he was inspired to remember.

 

[RevTestament]

Granted, Jesus kept the law.

He kept it in spiritual perfection, not like you or the jews of his day thought he ought to.

Now as far as the parable....

Abraham said if they did not believe Moses they would not believe one who came back from the dead.

You greatly err as Moses wrote of Christ the one who did come back from the dead and you still cannot see it.



John 5:39 KJV

39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

John 5:46 KJV

46 For had ye believed Moses, Ben Masada, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me.

:thumb:

 

[Interplanner]

Aikido,
race categories are really quite useless. John wrote against those who were rejecting Jesus' claim. He (John) was Jewish. If one Jewish person believes, then you do not have permission to refer to the race. Because race statements by nature must be 100% true.

 

[serpentdove]

Recommended reading:

The Jewish Trinity: How the Old Testament Reveals the Christian Godhead by Michael S. Heiser

"Course Outcomes

Upon successful completion you should be able to:

• Define the term “monotheism” in relation to the Old Testament
• Identify the various meanings of the word elohim in Old Testament usage
• Explain how Jewish monotheism does not contradict belief in a Godhead
• List three non-canonical Jewish writings that demonstrate belief in a Godhead
• Evaluate and refute objections to the deity of Jesus Christ made by Judaism and Jehovah’s Witnesses" Heiser, M. S. (2014). OT291 The Jewish Trinity: How the Old Testament Reveals the Christian Godhead. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.

 

[Interplanner]

Recommended reading:

The Jewish Trinity: How the Old Testament Reveals the Christian Godhead by Michael S. Heiser

"Course Outcomes

Upon successful completion you should be able to:

• Define the term “monotheism” in relation to the Old Testament
• Identify the various meanings of the word elohim in Old Testament usage
• Explain how Jewish monotheism does not contradict belief in a Godhead
• List three non-canonical Jewish writings that demonstrate belief in a Godhead
• Evaluate and refute objections to the deity of Jesus Christ made by Judaism and Jehovah’s Witnesses" Heiser, M. S. (2014). OT291 The Jewish Trinity: How the Old Testament Reveals the Christian Godhead. Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press.

have you heard Rabbi Dennis Prager on the trinity of Judaism (Elohim--'eretz--torah)?

 

[aikido7]

He doesn't call all Jews "children of the devil," just the Pharisees/Zadokites He was talking with.

The actual text I work from and depend on merely says "the Jews." There is nothing there about anyone else.

Jesus sermons in John teach that the physical nation of Israel as it was known to them was made up of a mixture of "true" Israelites and fake ones. Wheat and tares. Sheep and dogs. And He teaches that there is to be a reckoning in which the two are sorted out.

The Jesus John presents is 180 degrees away from the Jesus in the synoptics. John was so intent on bringing across his own theological agenda that he actually moved the day of Jesus's death up one complete 24-hour period so that it would fall on the Jewish Day of Preparation. John's gospel is full of early church theology and he eschews the idea that Jesus died on Passover as the other three accounts propose.

The point of the exchange in John 8, is to teach how to tell a true Israelite from a fake one. John 8:41 is the thesis statement.

Paul has it straight in Romans 9:6, as well.

Jarrod

I see your comments here as personal theology that is not specifically stated in John or Paul. It is and must remain an interpretation bouncing off what is actually there in the text. I see it as adding men's words to "the" Word.

 

[aikido7]

Nope. By rejecting God's messenger and exemplar, they were rejecting the Father, and were anti-Christ. John wrote what Jesus said, and what he was inspired to remember.

Anti-Semitic or not, these are the very verses Anti-Semites (including the Nazis then and the white power folks now) use to justify their prejudice.

The Jews held fast to their own religious culture and did not accept Jesus as the messiah. This was because the concept of a messiah was an anointed military king who would throw off the yoke of foreign domination. A messiah, first of all, would never be put to death on a cross. It was unthinkable to most normative Jews of the day.

Matthew tried his darndest to "prove" Jesus by taking out phrases from the Hebrew Bible but most Jews knew their scriptures well enough to ignore his efforts.

 

[RevTestament]

Anti-Semitic or not, these are the very verses Anti-Semites (including the Nazis then and the white power folks now) use to justify their prejudice.

The Jews held fast to their own religious culture and did not accept Jesus as the messiah. This was because the concept of a messiah was an anointed military king who would throw off the yoke of foreign domination. A messiah, first of all, would never be put to death on a cross. It was unthinkable to most normative Jews of the day.

Matthew tried his darndest to "prove" Jesus by taking out phrases from the Hebrew Bible but most Jews knew their scriptures well enough to ignore his efforts.

One cannot ignore scriptures like Proverbs 8. Jews didn't know their scriptures that well either. Was their Eliakim fastened as a nail in a sure place...
They took the law very literally, and refused to accept that it had a more important spiritual meaning even though YHWH told them He was full of their appointed feasts and animal sacrifices. The real point is that Judaism developed their own interpretation of the law, which they refused to depart from.
My point is not "anti-Semitic" either. I am not advocating hating Jews at all. There are plenty of anti-Christs. Muslims, etc. Christians are taught to love them and teach them - not hate them.

 

[aikido7]

...Christians are taught to love them and teach them - not hate them.

Most normative Jews feel patronized and dismissed by being "taught" religion by Christians.
If a Jew is labeled "Messianic" then they are not Jews. Simple as that.

The God of Israel allowed for a messiah, but it was not a Jesus figure who would be put to death on a cross. In Jewish tradition, the messiah was an anointed military king who would throw off the yoke of foreign domination for God's people.

Based on their tradition, Jesus could never be the messiah long hoped for by the Jews.

 

[chair]

One cannot ignore scriptures like Proverbs 8. Jews didn't know their scriptures that well either....

This is typical of the "proofs" of Jesus in the Hebrew Bible. Jesus isn't in that chapter of Proverbs unless you put him in there. It is about Wisdom.

How is it that what is supposedly the most important message in the Hebrew Bible is hidden in obscure verses and questionable interpretations?

 

[chair]

Most normative Jews feel patronized and dismissed by being "taught" religion by Christians.
If a Jew is labeled "Messianic" then they are not Jews. Simple as that.

The God of Israel allowed for a messiah, but it was not a Jesus figure who would be put to death on a cross. In Jewish tradition, the messiah was an anointed military king who would throw off the yoke of foreign domination for God's people.

Based on their tradition, Jesus could never be the messiah long hoped for by the Jews.

Indeed.

 

[patrick jane]

Indeed.

unbelief indeed. at every point in Biblical history, even today -

Hebrews 3:15-16 KJV - Hebrews 3:17 KJV - Hebrews 3:18-19 KJV -



Hebrews 4:1-2 KJV - Hebrews 4:3 KJV - Hebrews 4:6 KJV -

 

[Wick Stick]

The actual text I work from and depend on merely says "the Jews." There is nothing there about anyone else.

Verse 3 - "scribes and Pharisees."
Verse 13 - "Pharisees"

Perhaps your confusion is owing to the fact that "the Jews" were also in attendance, but they are the audience to the exchange between the Pharisees and Jesus.

I see your comments here as personal theology that is not specifically stated in John or Paul. It is and must remain an interpretation bouncing off what is actually there in the text. I see it as adding men's words to "the" Word.

I don't see how it could be stated more plainly. "They are not all Israel, which are of Israel." Romans 9:6.

What do you think it means?

Jarrod

 

[RevTestament]

Most normative Jews feel patronized and dismissed by being "taught" religion by Christians.

Isaiah 30:20 And though the Lord give you the bread of adversity, and the water of affliction, yet shall not thy teachers be removed into a corner any more, but thine eyes shall see thy teachers:

If a Jew is labeled "Messianic" then they are not Jews. Simple as that.

You can't change your ancestors. Jews are descended from Judah. I am part Jewish, but you wouldn't know that to look at me. So anyway in that sense I am a Jew.

Genesis 49:10 The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be.

The God of Israel allowed for a messiah, but it was not a Jesus figure who would be put to death on a cross. In Jewish tradition, the messiah was an anointed military king who would throw off the yoke of foreign domination for God's people.

What? Do u think u r teaching me something I don't know? I know what they expected. God sent those people's to punish them. Lev 26. So, no their Messiah wasn't going to remove the punishment.

Based on their tradition, Jesus could never be the messiah long hoped for by the Jews.

That is because they once again were interpreting the law temporally and not spiritually. Jesus opened the spiritual door of the law, and most slammed it shut.

 

[chair]

unbelief indeed. at every point in Biblical history, even today -

Hebrews 3:15-16 KJV - Hebrews 3:17 KJV - Hebrews 3:18-19 KJV -...

Why do you think I have any interest in quotations from your book?

 

[aikido7]

Verse 3 - "scribes and Pharisees."
Verse 13 - "Pharisees"

Perhaps your confusion is owing to the fact that "the Jews" were also in attendance, but they are the audience to the exchange between the Pharisees and Jesus.

Pharisees, scribes and the Sadducees were all within normative Judaism. In short, they were Jews. I don't know where you get the idea that the audience only was the Jews. Where, specifically, are you getting this? Not from what is clearly there.

I don't see how it could be stated more plainly. "They are not all Israel, which are of Israel." Romans 9:6.

What do you think it means?

Jarrod

I don't know enough to tell you right now, since my focus is on the anti-Jewish rhetoric attributed to Jesus in John's gospel. I don't see how Paul's letters ever addressed the subject. But maybe he did. I just don't see it.

 

[aikido7]

Isaiah 30:20 And though the Lord give you the bread of adversity, and the water of affliction, yet shall not thy teachers be removed into a corner any more, but thine eyes shall see thy teachers:

You can't change your ancestors. Jews are descended from Judah. I am part Jewish, but you wouldn't know that to look at me. So anyway in that sense I am a Jew.

Genesis 49:10 The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be.


What? Do u think u r teaching me something I don't know? I know what they expected. God sent those people's to punish them. Lev 26. So, no their Messiah wasn't going to remove the punishment.

That is because they once again were interpreting the law temporally and not spiritually. Jesus opened the spiritual door of the law, and most slammed it shut.

It seems to me that you are stringing beads taken out of context to build your own theological necklace. That makes for sloppy hermeneutics and even worse theology.

But you seem pretty well confident of your unique findings, so there is not too much you will allow me to say to you.

 

[serpentdove]

have you heard Rabbi Dennis Prager on the trinity of Judaism (Elohim--'eretz--torah)?

Prager teaches the first five books of the bible. Unfortunately, he doesn’t have a biblical worldview. He’s a behaviorist. He finds some Commandments important and others—not so much. :idunno: Recently he discussed a man he knows who committed adultery on his wife--but to Prager's mind this was understandable

because his wife was old and barely knew who he was due to her suffering from dementia. :reals: Murder? Now that upsets Prager. :sozo2: Tossing puppies off of bridges? This would probably upset him, as well.

“Mt 5:19 shall be called least … shall be called great. Any violation of God’s law makes one least in the kingdom, which is equal to being outside the kingdom and under condemnation (cf. Gal. 3:10–12). The one who keeps God’s law is great, which is equal to being in the kingdom and in God’s salvation. In chap. 13, the parables of the tares (13:24–30) and the dragnet (13:47–50) indicate that in the visible, external kingdom of those who identify with God there will be true and false people (cf. 7:21–27). The “least” refers to those who will be judged and cast out (13:30, 41, 42, 49, 50) while the “great” shall be included and rewarded (v. 43).” MacArthur, J., Jr. (Ed.). (1997). The MacArthur Study Bible (electronic ed., p. 1400). Nashville, TN: Word Pub.