Reasons Jews Reject Jesus

[Reggie Belafonte]

The only worthy Jew is a Christian one, who is Saved ! Truly Born again, for they are worthy of the Name Israel !
As we see with Nathaniel and Jacob were truly worthy of God in fact !

Idol some clown because the idiot claims to be a Jew is pathetic !
Most Jews nowadays are not even worthy of the OT in fact. and sadly this is what the media etc etc idol as Jews ?
Non worthy Jews becoming an Idol to all fools. But look at the OT who are they who stand out ? not the Mob but who is worthy is pointed out in fact and who is not worthy is pointed out and all for good reason as to why it is so !

Look at all the trouble that Holy Moses had within for one. what stupid idiots that i have come across, demanding that all Jews are worthy regardless as well as any so called Jews ! One would have to be carnal to swallow such nonsense ! or a religious idiot !
Religion never Saved anyone's Soul ! Only Christ Jesus Saves ones Soul. and that is what happened to the worthy Jews when Jesus went to Heaven ! for they were his disciples who were worthy of Holy Moses and that's why they had faith in Jesus and then got the message when Jesus went to Heaven !
The other Jews were lost ! totally Lost ! for they had been robed by the same bastards that tried to kill Holy Moses and they who crept in etc, they clearly are not worthy of God at all and that's why any person who rejects Jesus Christ is a bastard in fact and you better believe it is so ! and one should not listen to such as that ilk, for they will only lead one astray, they are of this world ! that is full of deceptions and delusions !
For they are the same cursed bastards who would kill Jesus, just as their ilk did in fact !
As Jesus said of such people, that they were of their Father of Lies and was a Murderer from the begining. it's proven fact !

No one is worthy of God until they are Truly born again ! and Jesus went to bring the OT Saints to Heaven because they were worthy of God, for they did his will ! For They are the Blessed ! and not just some ninny within the Tribe. or claiming all in the Tribe are worthy as that is just totally stupid and false !

 

[Ronald David Bruno]

In summary, I consider the Geneva Bible rendering of John 1:1-5 to be a superior translation and the Messiah’s own faith / belief in God for interpreting / understanding OT and NT scripture.

The Geneva translation concerning these verses is way off the mark:
"All things were made by it, and without it was made nothing that was made. In it was life, and that life was the light of men. And that light shineth in the darkenesse, and the darkenesse comprehended it not."
Look up the Greek interlinear Bible. "Him" is used , not "it". The Word is God and so the WORD IS NOT AN "IT". Do you often refer to God as "it"?

Let's look at the Geneva translation referring to Jesus as the Creator in Col. 1:16-7 it is the same word used. The translator got it right in this verse:


"For by him were all things created which are in heaven, and which are in earth, things visible and invisible: whether they be Thrones, or Dominions, or Principalities, or Powers, all things were created by him, and for him. And he is before all things, and in him all things consist."

You could examine the Greek interlinear Bible for both scriptures. "Him" is used referring to God/Jesus. Evidently the Geneva translator was also confused, as you are. Out of 69 translations, you just searched for one that supported your view. It's the only one that says "it". In verse five, "it" can be used because it is referring to the LIGHT. Still, I would refer to the LIGHT as it

Scriptures support eachother, they are in harmony. These are crucial scriptures that speak about Who God is. Jesus is the Logos. Do a study on that, it's deep.

 

[Matthias]

The Geneva translation concerning these verses is way off the mark:
"All things were made by it, and without it was made nothing that was made. In it was life, and that life was the light of men. And that light shineth in the darkenesse, and the darkenesse comprehended it not."
Look up the Greek interlinear Bible. "Him" is used , not "it". The Word is God and so the WORD IS NOT AN "IT". Do you often refer to God as "it"?

The Geneva Bible - described as “a superb translation.”

1599 Geneva Bible (GNV) - Version Information - BibleGateway.com

www.biblegateway.com

The Geneva Bible is the Bible of the Protestant Reformation. Why do you think the Reformers produced it?

I refer to God’s thoughts and verbal expression, his word, as ”it”. I don’t ever refer to God himself as “it”. He is my Father; the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.

The point, which you rightly sense: there is a completely different connotation of John’s prologue conveyed in the Geneva Bible translation (and those English which preceded it, Tynadale and others).

Let's look at the Geneva translation referring to Jesus as the Creator in Col. 1:16-7 it is the same word used. The translator got it right in this verse:


"For by him were all things created which are in heaven, and which are in earth, things visible and invisible: whether they be Thrones, or Dominions, or Principalities, or Powers, all things were created by him, and for him. And he is before all things, and in him all things consist."

You could examine the Greek interlinear Bible for both scriptures. "Him" is used referring to God/Jesus. Evidently the Geneva translator was also confused, as you are. Out of 69 translations, you just searched for one that supported your view. It's the only one that says "it". In verse five, "it" can be used because it is referring to the LIGHT. Still, I would refer to the LIGHT as it

Scriptures support eachother, they are in harmony. These are crucial scriptures that speak about Who God is. Jesus is the Logos. Do a study on that, it's deep.

For the Colossians passage, see “in him” rather than “by him”.

 

[Matthias]

The Tyndale Bible translation of John’s prologue.

John 1 - TYN - Bible Study Tools

John 1 In the beginnynge was the worde and the worde was with God: and the worde was God. The same was in the beginnynge with God. All thinges were made by it and with out it was made nothinge that was made. In it was lyfe and the lyfe was ye lyght of men a... Read verse in Tyndale

www.biblestudytools.com

Excellent, imo. “Way off the mark,” in the opinion of others. That the connotation is different has been acknowledged.

Everyone has their own logos. It isn’t another person. It is their thought, expressed and/or unexpressed.

Jesus is the incarnation of God’s own logos.

 

[Ronald David Bruno]

For the Colossians passage, see “in him” rather than “by him”.

No, you said the Geneva Bible is superb and it is your choice and it says "BY Him":
"For by him were all things created which are in heaven, and which are in earth, things visible and invisible: whether they be Thrones, or Dominions, or Principalities, or Powers, all things were created by him, and for him. And he is before all things, and in him all things consist." Geneva Bible

So it's the old picking and choosing which scriptures work for you and then if it doesn't, you look for a translation that does. They call that flip flopping. Bill Clinton used to do that all the time. Liberals do that a lot ... Oh no, are you one of those progressive liberals, picking and choosing whatever works for them and discarding or distorting the rest?

 

[Matthias]

No, you said the Geneva Bible is superb and it is your choice and it says "BY Him":
"For by him were all things created which are in heaven, and which are in earth, things visible and invisible: whether they be Thrones, or Dominions, or Principalities, or Powers, all things were created by him, and for him. And he is before all things, and in him all things consist." Geneva Bible

I was speaking specifically about the prologue in John’s Gospel.

All translations have strengths and weaknesses. The (trinitarian) source I quoted about the Geneva Bible described it as a superb translation. For “in him” see other translations.

So it's the old picking and choosing which scriptures work for you and then if it doesn't, you look for a translation that does. They call that flip flopping. Bill Clinton used to do that all the time. Liberals do that a lot ... Oh no, are you one of those progressive liberals, picking and choosing whatever works for them and discarding or distorting the rest?

Why did the Protestant reformers produce a translation which you said is “way off the mark” on John’s prologue? They hold your theological position, not mine.

 

[ButterflyJones]

No, you said the Geneva Bible is superb and it is your choice and it says "BY Him":
"For by him were all things created which are in heaven, and which are in earth, things visible and invisible: whether they be Thrones, or Dominions, or Principalities, or Powers, all things were created by him, and for him. And he is before all things, and in him all things consist." Geneva Bible

So it's the old picking and choosing which scriptures work for you and then if it doesn't, you look for a translation that does. They call that flip flopping. Bill Clinton used to do that all the time. Liberals do that a lot ... Oh no, are you one of those progressive liberals, picking and choosing whatever works for them and discarding or distorting the rest?

They are trying very hard, and failing, to further deny Jesus authenticity. Have you noticed?

 

[Matthias]

They are trying very hard, and failing, to further deny Jesus authenticity. Have you noticed?

I’d like to know if @Ronald David Bruno has noticed that you’re a unitarian.

 

[Waiting on him]

Why did the Jews reject And murder him and the true prophets of God?

They rejected their religion.

 

[ButterflyJones]

I’d like to know if @Ronald David Bruno has noticed that you’re a unitarian.

Absolutely not. Because I'm not one.

I don't labor to discredit Jesus.

Therefore, lame retaliation efforts against me so to sidetrack members taking notice of your Eisegesis are transparent, and further evidence against your character.

Please, continue.
Philippians 3:17 Join together in following my example, brothers and sisters, and just as you have us as a model, keep your eyes on those who live as we do. 18 For, as I have often told you before and now tell you again even with tears, many live as enemies of the cross of Christ. 19 Their destiny is destruction, their god is their stomach, and their glory is in their shame. Their mind is set on earthly things. 20 But our citizenship is in heaven.

 

[Matthias]

Absolutely not. Because I'm not one.

I don't labor to discredit Jesus.

Therefore, lame retaliation efforts against me so to sidetrack members taking notice of your Eisegesis are transparent, and further evidence against your character.

Please, continue.
Philippians 3:17 Join together in following my example, brothers and sisters, and just as you have us as a model, keep your eyes on those who live as we do. 18 For, as I have often told you before and now tell you again even with tears, many live as enemies of the cross of Christ. 19 Their destiny is destruction, their god is their stomach, and their glory is in their shame. Their mind is set on earthly things. 20 But our citizenship is in heaven.

You said you believe Jesus is the Father. And the Son.

And the Holy Spirit?

You’ve also written in opposition to trinitarianism.

 

[ButterflyJones]

Why did the Jews reject And murder him and the true prophets of God?

They rejected their religion.

When their forefathers cursed their future generations saying, let his (Jesus), blood be on our heads and those of our children, they'd be hard pressed today to recognize that same Jesus now as their Messiah.

It's a conspiracy today.

 

[Matthias]

Isaiah 53 is not a forbidden chapter in Judaism.

 

[Johann]

Isaiah 53 is not a forbidden chapter in Judaism.

Get schooled-learn-and don't bother to reply.
Johann.

 

[Matthias]

Isaiah 53 is not a forbidden chapter in Judaism.

Debunking "The Forbidden Chapter” Conspiracy

jewsforjudaism.org

 

[Johann]

Debunking "The Forbidden Chapter” Conspiracy

jewsforjudaism.org

Ah-so you side with Tovia as to Is 53?

No need for a man of your stature to open the link or give Michal Brown a listen?


So, who and what is Isaiah 53 speaking about?

Starting in Isaiah 52, the prophet describes the reaction of the nations of the world when they witness[1] the future and ultimate messianic redemption of the Jewish people.

Since the nations viewed the Jewish people scornfully and considered them rejected by God and deserving of divine suffering, they will be shocked and dumbfounded[2] when they witness God’s unexpected and glorious redemption of the Jewish people.

At this point, the nations and their leaders will be left wondering, and conclude that the Jewish people did not suffer because God rejected them, as they mistakenly thought; instead, it was because they persecuted the Jewish people beyond what they may have deserved.[3]

This is the meaning of the passage, “he (Israel) was wounded from our (the nations) transgression and bruised from our iniquities” (Isaiah 53:5). Israel suffered from the mistreatment of the nations.[4]

You believe this garbage?


This is the meaning of the passage, “he (Israel) was wounded from our (the nations) transgression and bruised from our iniquities” (Isaiah 53:5). Israel suffered from the mistreatment of the nations.

In English translations of this chapter, missionaries mistranslate the prefix (מ) as “for” rather than “from” to manipulate the text and make it sound like the Servant will suffer for the sins of the Jewish people.

This idea that the Jewish people suffered because of the nations’ misdeeds is repeated in the passage “for the transgress of my people they (לָֽמוֹ) were stricken”(Isaiah 53:8). The word (לָֽמוֹ) is biblical Hebrew and is a plural word as in, “a statue that He gave to them.” (Psalm 99:7). Missionaries incorrectly translated this word as “he” in Isaiah 53:7 to make it sound like it is speaking about a single individual, i.e. Jesus.

Furthermore. Christian missionaries incorrectly change the role of Messiah from a physical redeemer from oppression and exile to a spiritual savior from sin.

Although all Jewish commentators believe that the straightforward identification of the servant in Isaiah 53 is Israel, some, on an allegorical level, identify the servant as the messiah. They do so because, as a member of the Jewish people, the messiah can bear the responsibility to alleviate a portion of punishment on behalf of the rest of the nation.[5]

A similar example of this concept is found in Numbers 4:19-20, where the children of Kehat bear the responsibility by carrying the Ark at considerable risk to themselves, on behalf of the rest of the nation so no one else would die. Amazingly, just before Isaiah 53, Israel is referred to as "bearers of the vessels of the Lord" (Isaiah 52:11).

In contrast to Christian belief, no Jewish commentary claims that the Messiah will die for our sins or that we need to believe in, or even know about him, to benefit from his suffering. Even without our knowledge, his suffering alleviates a portion of the nation’s suffering. It is also noteworthy that under the influence of paganism, the early Christians also transformed the Messiah into a deity. The Christian beliefs that the Messiah dies for our sins and is divine are both foreign to Judaism and not based on the Tanach.

I have presented a brief overview of Isaiah 53 and how missionaries distort the original text to fit Jesus into the picture. This overview also demonstrated the danger of reading passages or a chapter out of context.

If you would like a more in-depth and analytical explanation of Isaiah 53 Jews for Judaism has multiple resources including Isaiah 53 - Verse by Verse on our website and

on our YouTube channel.

Rabbi Bentzion Kravitz

You are something-
J.

 

[Matthias]

For “in him” see other translations.

ASV, AMPC, DRA, EHV, LSB, Mounce, NABRE, NCB, NET, NIRV, NIV, NRSV, NTE, OJB, RSV, WYC, YLT. And others. Note also that many translations which render the passage “by him” contain a note saying “or in him”.

Colossians 1:16 - Bible Gateway

www.biblegateway.com

 

[Matthias]

Isaiah 53 is not a forbidden chapter in Judaism.

Jewish commentary on Isaiah 53 is readily available for anyone - Jew or non-Jew, anyone - who cares to read it.

Isaiah 53 is not a chapter forbidden by Jews to read. I’ve had many conversations with Jews about the chapter. I didn’t agree with their understanding of the chapter and they didn’t agree with my understanding of the chapter. What we were easily about to agree on is that Isaiah 53 is not and never has been forbidden reading for Jews.

The last time I discussed it with a Jew was on a visit to a synagogue. I discussed it with the rabbi and with other members of the synagogue. All were well acquainted with the chapter, long before my visit and conversation with them.

 

[Johann]

Analysis

Who is this “servant” who will prosper? To know who he is we should have a look at the previous passages that are in actual fact related to chapter 53. For example, in Isaiah 41:8 the verse says,”But you, O Israel, my servant, Jacob, whom I have chosen.”

Once again in verse 9 it says,”I said,‘You are my servant’; I have chosen you and have not rejected you.” In Isaiah 43:1 we read,”..he who created you, O Jacob, he who formed you, O Israel.” And again in Isaiah 44:1 says,”But now listen, O Jacob, my servant, Israel, whom I have chosen.”

In all those instances the same Hebrew word is used namely ‘ebed which means servant(’abd in Arabic). Look carefully at the verses and notice that the servant(’ebed) is mentioned along side Jacob and Israel. Thus it is safe to say that in verse 13 of chapter 52 the servant is not Jesus but rather the nation of Israel portrayed in one man namely, Jacob. According to Rabbi Rashi and the like it is a representation of the people of Israel.

First, there is no “Rabbi Rashi”. “Rashi” is not a proper name but the acronym for Rabbi Shlomo Yitzchaqi (*).

He did hold the view that this is about Israel as a nation and he is mostly responsible for this view being held by the overwhelming majority of orthodox Jews today, though his predecessors and many rabbis after him have rejected this view and applied it to the Messiah instead. For example, Moshe Ibn Crispin (14th century) has said about this chapter:

This Parashah [i.e. passage] the commentators agree in explaining of the Captivity of Israel, although the singular number is used in it throughout. The expression My Servant they compare rashly with Isaiah 41:8, "you Israel are My servant"; here, however, he does not mention Israel, but simply says, My servant; we cannot therefore understand the word in the same sense. … here he says My servant alone, and uniformly employs the singular, as there is no cause constraining us to do so, why should we here interpret the word collectively, and thereby distort the passage from its natural sense? …

As then it seemed to me that the doors of the literal interpretation of the Parashah were shut in their face, and that "they wearied themselves to find the entrance," having forsaken the knowledge of our Teachers [i.e. the Sages], and inclined after the "stubbornness of their own hearts," and of their own opinion, I am pleased to interpret it, in accordance with the teaching of our Rabbis [i.e. the Sages], of the King Messiah, and will be careful, so far as I am able, to adhere to the literal sense; thus, possibly, I shall be free from the forced and far-fetched interpretations of which others have been guilty.

(Adolf Neubauer and S.R. Driver, The Fifty-third Chapter of Isaiah According to the Jewish Interpreters, New York: Ktav, 1969, Vol. II, p. 99-100; boldface and underline emphasis mine; an older edition is available online)

Eved Adonai – The Servant of the Lord in Isaiah 53

Get your facts straight @Matthias and since you run to Jews for Judaism-Tovia spearheading the "Revived Sanhedrin"-I make the assumption you believe as he do.

Bring something to the table-hound of Judaism.
Read the link-since most of you do not read "links"

Johann.

 

[Johann]

ASV, AMPC, DRA, EHV, LSB, Mounce, NABRE, NCB, NET, NIRV, NIV, NRSV, NTE, OJB, RSV, WYC, YLT. And others. Note also that many translations which render the passage “by him” contain a note saying “or in him”.

οτι εν αυτω εκτισθη τα παντα τα εν τοις ουρανοις και τα επι της γης τα ορατα και τα αορατα ειτε θρονοι ειτε κυριοτητες ειτε αρχαι ειτε εξουσιαι τα παντα δι αυτου και εις αυτον εκτισται

So what is your exegesis on this passage-does it say Jesus is a created being?
Johann.