Not directly but indirectly. Jesus reffered to himself as the "I AM" (Mar 14:53–14:65) just as God called himself the "I AM" in the burning bush (Exo 3:13–14). The High Priest knew what he meant, which is why he tore his clothes and called Jesus a blasphemer.
Reasons Jews Reject Jesus
- Thread starter Wrangler
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
Not directly but indirectly. Jesus reffered to himself as the "I AM" (Mar 14:53–14:65) just as God called himself the "I AM" in the burning bush (Exo 3:13–14). The High Priest knew what he meant, which is why he tore his clothes and called Jesus a blasphemer.
Behold
Well-Known Member
If you created the world, (The Earth) would you be "God" according to Genesis?
Read John 1:10 for the update (KJV).
This verse is a reference to the Father, not to Christ.
A study of the context reveals that this section opens in verse 6 by telling us, “There came a man who was sent by God.” We are told, “God is light,” and that God’s light shown through Jesus Christ and made him “the light of the world.” Though God was in the world in many ways, including through His Son, the world did not recognize him. He came unto his own by sending his exact image, Jesus Christ, to them, but even then they did not receive God, in that they rejected His emissary.
Jn 1:6–13 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. He came as a witness, to bear witness about the light, that all might believe through him. He was not the light, but came to bear witness about the light. The true light, which gives light to everyone, was coming into the world.
He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God (Note than it does not say he gave them the right to be His children), who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God (also does not say born of Himself).
The fact that the world did not receive Him is made more profound in the context as Scripture reveals how earnestly God reached out to them—He made his plan and purpose flesh and shined His light through Christ to reach the world—but they did not receive Him, even though He was offering them the “right to become children of God”.
Some scholars make the phrase, “the world was made by him,” a reference to the new creation only (see Col. 1:15-20, Heb. 1:2, and Heb. 1:10). Also, scripture uses cosmos to mean people groups and not just the planet.
In context, this verse does not negate Yahweh's claim that He alone is God.
A study of the context reveals that this section opens in verse 6 by telling us, “There came a man who was sent by God.” We are told, “God is light,” and that God’s light shown through Jesus Christ and made him “the light of the world.” Though God was in the world in many ways, including through His Son, the world did not recognize him. He came unto his own by sending his exact image, Jesus Christ, to them, but even then they did not receive God, in that they rejected His emissary.
Jn 1:6–13 There was a man sent from God, whose name was John. He came as a witness, to bear witness about the light, that all might believe through him. He was not the light, but came to bear witness about the light. The true light, which gives light to everyone, was coming into the world.
He was in the world, and the world was made through him, yet the world did not know him. He came to his own, and his own people did not receive him. But to all who did receive him, who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God (Note than it does not say he gave them the right to be His children), who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God (also does not say born of Himself).
The fact that the world did not receive Him is made more profound in the context as Scripture reveals how earnestly God reached out to them—He made his plan and purpose flesh and shined His light through Christ to reach the world—but they did not receive Him, even though He was offering them the “right to become children of God”.
Some scholars make the phrase, “the world was made by him,” a reference to the new creation only (see Col. 1:15-20, Heb. 1:2, and Heb. 1:10). Also, scripture uses cosmos to mean people groups and not just the planet.
In context, this verse does not negate Yahweh's claim that He alone is God.
Pancho Frijoles
Active Member
According to Acts 5, people who are fighting against God are people who, by trying to attack religious freedom, find themselves prohibiting truth reaching others.
Some disciples had been arrested and put into prison. Sanhedrin priests were prohibiting them to preach.
Gamaliel then called those priests to stop pestering the disciples, regardless of whether their doctrine was man-made or God-made. Gamaliel called for respect to religious freedom.
Let's read
“Men of Israel, take heed to yourselves what you intend to do concerning these men. 36 For in previous days Theudas rose up, boasting to be somebody, to whom a number of about four hundred men joined themselves. He was killed, and all who obeyed him were dispersed and came to nothing. After Theudas, Judas the Galilean rose up in the days of the census and drew away many people after him. This man also perished, and all who obeyed him were scattered. Now I tell you, keep away from these men and leave them alone, because if this intention or this activity is of men, it will come to nothing. But if it is of God, you will not be able to overthrow them, lest perhaps you be found even fighting against God.”
Therefore, unless people are making a call to do evil, or prohibiting religious freedom, people presenting their doctrinal arguments should not be considered as "fighting against God" just because their arguments are wrong. If we are not careful with our language, we are planting the seed of violence towards "spiritual enemies" of our own invention.
Pavel Mosko
Active Member
This is a topic I have been interested in for a long time. There are some insights to be gained from these objections. But I got to say there is a certain amount of sophistry and disinformation from the rabbis. I speak exactly about rabbi Tovia Singher of "Jews for Judaism", and the general project of trying to counter Christian claims with their own Apologetics. There is an awful lot going on in Second Temple Judaism that later Jews of the Talmudic era would like to bury but they actually bolster a lot of Christian claims when folks like Tovia would like to claim the various Christian doctrines that Jews don't believe in like the virgin birth, Trinity etc. are all from "pagan corruption" of the Jewish Scriptures etc.
Pancho Frijoles
Active Member
Enemies behave like enemies.
Paul knew very well how an enemy of Christ behaved, since he had been one of them.
Many Jews considered the followers of Christs a sect of Judaism... a potentially dangerous sect... a sect that defied the Law of Moses, and preached a King and Kingdome to come, which put them in trouble with Roman authorities, who interpreted that as sedition.
So, many Jews exerted all kind of verbal, social or even physical violence against first Christians and were perceived, understandably, as enemies of God.
However, Paul was clear that Christians should not consider as enemies those who just didn't want to obey Paul's teachings.
Be on your guard against any followers who refuse to obey what we have written in this letter. Put them to shame by not having anything to do with them. Don't consider them your enemies. Instead, speak kindly to them as you would to any other follower. (1 Tes 3:14-16)
* NOTE: By the way, Christians of Gentile origin also exerted some violence against Jews, which worried Paul a lot and led him to write his apology of Israel on chapters 9 to 11.
Pancho Frijoles
Active Member
Dear Matthias, dear friends
Let me share with you two thoughts here:
First.
The enemies of God are called enemies because THEY consider God (or God's children) as their enemy and act accordingly.
However, we don't consider them our enemies and, certainly, God does not consider them His enemies.
That's why we treat them with love and God treats them with love. Paul himself, in the same epistle, reassures believers from Gentile origin that Jews are beloved by God.
Everytime the Bible speaks about our enemies, it refers to their perspective, not ours.
Everytime the Bible speaks about God's enemies, it refers to their perspective, not God's.
Second.
To reject God's gospel implies to reject repentance from evil deeds. This is what Jesus Christ Himself described as condemnation:
And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. (John 3:19)
If a Jew believed that Jesus didn't meet the messianic requirements set by the Tanakh, and then comes to realize Jesus met those requirements, he has changed his mind. He has nothing to repent from. He was not fighting God nor rejecting the Gospel.
When Peter addressed the Jews in the Day of Pentecost, he urged them to repent not from an intellectual mistake, but for having delivered Jesus to death. That was their wickedness. Their rejection to Jesus as Messiah was intimately connected with their murderous action.
"Him, being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain... Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ." (Acts 2:23, 36)
Those who will not listen to and obey God, who curse those who do, are resisting God, fighting against God, are God’s enemies.
Pancho Frijoles
Active Member
To disobey Paul is to disobey God?
I ask the question because Paul explicitly asks the brethren not to consider as enemies those who don't obey his inspired teachings.
- Feb 14, 2021
- 20,773
- 9,007
- 113
- 57
- Faith
- Christian
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
Many tend to defend what they've been indoctrinated with.
And I find that those who cannot defend the things that they have been indoctrinated with get hostile.
“I’m often asked, ‘Why don’t Jewish people recognize Isaiah 53 as a Messianic prophecy fulfilled by Jesus?’
The answer is rooted in this: Isaiah 53 never explicitly says the subject is the Messiah.
As believers in Yeshua, we view Isaiah 53 through the lens of the New Testament. Because we trust its authority, we naturally see Jesus as the clear fulfillment of that chapter.
But within mainstream Jewish tradition, a passage is typically considered Messianic only if it clearly and explicitly refers to the Messiah, usually described as a future descendant of David.
For example: ‘I will set over them one shepherd, My servant David; he shall feed them and be their shepherd. And I, the LORD, will be their God, and My servant David shall be prince among them.’ - Ezekiel 34:23-24
This is what Jews traditionally identify as a Messianic prophecy - specific, Davidic, and future-oriented. This is a generalization but holds predominantly true.
Isaiah 53, on the other hand, doesn’t mention the Messiah by name or lineage.
That’s why, for most Jewish readers, it doesn’t register as a Messianic text.
Jesus is ‘concealed’ in the Old Testament, ‘revealed’ in the New.”
(Rabbi Brian Samuel)
This gives us some good insight into why Jews typically don’t consider Isaiah 53 to be Messianic and why the followers of Jesus do.
It has nothing to do with the absurd claim that Jews are forbidden to read Isaiah 53.
dak
Well-Known Member
- Feb 9, 2013
- 1,460
- 188
- 63
- Faith
- Other Faith
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
This whole page, (pg 52 of the thread), was an excellent discourse from both sides.
This your statement, Significantly, in 49:1-6, the Servant, who is clearly an individual, is called “Israel” in v. 3 but has the mission of restoring Jacob and regathering Israel in vv. 5-6., I believe reaches to the core of the greatest problem which divides all sides.
Yisrael throughout the suffering servant passages is called the Chosen, or Chosen One, or Yisrael My Chosen, ect., etc., (see Luke 9:35 ASV, (N/A, W/H)). The real problem in understanding is therefore: by whose authority is the nomen sacrum iota-eta, (Ι̅Η), to be rendered as Jesus, or Jesu, or Yeshu, or Yeshua, or any other such form of that name? No one can even say his name without the Spirit, (1 Cor 12:3), which means it must be learned through the writings and the understandings taught therein, and especially when it comes to the oldest Uncial-Greek nomina sacra, (originally only four, with case endings added later when proper nouns were also given case endings). If we receive the wrong interpretation of the name from traditions of men then we receive error in our doctrine. We are all to be taught of Elohim, not men.
Matthew 12:14-21 KJV (with nomen sacrum Ι̅Η in v.5)
14 Then the Pharisees went out, and held a council against him, how they might destroy him.
15 But when Ι̅Η knew it, he withdrew himself from thence: and great multitudes followed him, and he healed them all;
16 And charged them that they should not make him known:
17 That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet, saying,
18 Behold my servant, whom I have chosen; my beloved, in whom my soul is well pleased: I will put my spirit upon him, and he shall shew judgment to the Gentiles.
19 He shall not strive, nor cry; neither shall any man hear his voice in the streets.
20 A bruised reed shall he not break, and smoking flax shall he not quench, till he send forth judgment unto victory.
21 And in his name shall the Gentiles trust.
Best look into it and get it right, according to the Word, not the words of men.
David in NJ
Well-Known Member
Similar threads
