Does the term "Jewish Christian" make sense?

Post Reply New Topic

Psalm 2:1-7:
"Why do the nations conspire and the peoples plot in vain? The kings of the earth take their stand and the rulers gather together against the LORD and against his Anointed One. 'Let us break their chains,' they say, 'and throw off their fetters.' The One enthroned in heaven laughs; the Lord scoffs at them. Then he rebukes them in his anger and terrifies them in his wrath, saying, 'I have installed my King on Zion, my holy hill.' I will proclaim the decree of the LORD: He said to me, 'You are my Son; today I have become your Father.'"


The entire New Testament was written by practicing Jews, making them as much "Judaic texts" as the Tanakh. And "differently" can only refer to the modern era, since Yeshua and his disciples didn't change anything about Judaism -- they didn't have to, because he fit the mold of the foretold Messiah perfectly.



You can continue to talk about "Judaism" (modern rabbinic add-ons and changes to traditional Jewish spiritual thought) if you wish, while I continue to discuss the Scriptures themselves. (I swear, that is the only thing wrong with what is currently called Judaism -- that most of its practitioners do not read or reverence their own Scriptures and value them above funny little modern rabbinic tweaks, surmizings, and ruminations. Christians often fail in just the same way. Listening to preachers and popes, when they should be opening their Bibles. No rabbi is going to improve on the Torah, and no preacher is going to improve on the Bible -- why do they try?)

The devil is never indicated in the Tanakh to be anything less than a real being. If you disagree, say why.



You know it's part of our Bible, right?


Oh, c'mon now, don't play the "insulting" card this early. Don't prove my point that Jews get angry that other Jews believe Yeshua was the Messiah. After all, that's all I've been saying this whole time. How can it offend you, except on some spiritual level? It certainly can't offend you on a logical level, because Yeshua didn't fail to meet any of the prophetic criteria to be who I say he is; therefore, you can't accuse me of logical malfeasance. So, explain your "offense", please.

Ragtime, all words require interpretation. I think organized religion is pretty much Exhibit A to that point. No two people are going to interpret any given text exactly alike. What you don't seem to understand is that in the rabbinical tradition of Judaism, reading and studying the interpretations is important. I'm no Talmudic scholar myself, but to me it makes sense that interpretation is important. Frankly a lot of the stories in the Bible make no sense standing on their own. The rabbinical tradition believes in engaging in the issues through debate and consensus. That's the only practical way to do it, IMHO, unless you're forming a religion of one. My Reform rabbis have always tried to make the Torah relevant in the modern day, and I appreciate that. I think it's absurd to think that we can understand truth ONLY by looking at a document 5000+ years old. To me, I think it's obvious that you can't interpret the Bible exactly, 100% literally in today's society. I'm not a fundamentalist.

I was offended by your suggestion because you basically implied that any Jew who doesn't fall for your line is simply being deceived by the devil. Nonsense, we just have different opinions and interpretations. I frankly find it hard to debate with anyone of any religion who thinks that there is a One and Only Truth.

There was someone that mentioned this, not sure if it was parakeet, about a judeo-christian denomination somewhere, they believe in Jesus and also hold jewish traditions, like the 10 commandments and stuff, they believe to be the way early christians were suppose to be in the first century.

According to what I have read, early christians after the crucifixion, have been referred as Judeo-christians, because they held their jewish traditions while accepting the divinity of Jesus and following his teachings.

Impossible actually. This won't be a debate, this will be one side presenting their view, and the other side presenting theirs. The only point of this is to maybe, and hopefully, positively influence someone on the side lines looking in on the presentations. This will either strengthen the cords of belief(in their view strengthen their bond with God), or it will loosen the cords so that they may be thrown off. At any rate, it all comes down to belief.



Right. Then we start with the first problem/s, that of birth. (I won't mention the fact that most of these "proofs" have nothing to do with Messianic prophecy and are seemingly pulled out of someones backside and slapped on, I just won't. ) So birth then.

The claim is that Jesus is the descendant of David, and that he is born of a virgin. Kings are descended from the father's seed(Genesis 49:10 and Isaiah 11:1), not from the mother's(Who have no seed), and you of course claim that Jesus(Being born of a virgin) has no earthly father. You say he is descended from David through his mother(using Genesis 3:15), hmmm. Here we seem to have a Miscomprehension or a misapplication of the verse.

We'll move right along to the virgin claim. You derive this claim from a mistranslation of Isaiah 7:14. Grammatical and Contextual proof of such error.

Let's go back a bit, as I skipped the first "proof" to that of Jesus being a prophet. The claim is that Jesus was a prophet like unto Moses. The underlined talks about Paul and Jesus.

I could go on, but I'd like to get to bed, so I'll skip down to the bottom. The claim is that Jesus is the Son of God, in reference to a supposed trinity that is one. There is no trinity and Jesus is not God.

And of course we have these requirements, which Jesus failed to fulfill quickly, as he(And Paul) prophesied he would(Making him a false prophet as shown above):

A. Build the Third Temple (Ezekiel 37:26-28 ).
B. Gather all Jews back to the Land of Israel (Isaiah 43:5-6).
C. Usher in an era of world peace, and end all hatred, oppression, suffering and disease. (Isaiah 2:4, 11:6, Micah 4:3)
D. The entire world will believe in G-d (Isa. 11:9, 40:5; Zephaniah 3:9).

So, your rabbis fill in the gaps in the story with whatever they want, and then consider yourself better acquainted with God for it? That doesn't really make sense.


No, I'm saying that there is one Messiah.

But if we have different Messiah's, then logically, only one can be the correct one. And Yeshua fits those prophecies better than any other person in history.

That sounds familiar. Where have I heard that before? Oh yes, it's from Deut 6:4: "Hear, O Israel: The LORD our God is one LORD." That is said for a reason. The Reform de-emphasize this concept of exclusive truth, a concept which is fundamental to the laws of logic. Something cannot be both truth and untrue. We cannot believe opposite things (i.e. who the Messiah is), and both be right.

My only point to make in this thread is that belief in Yeshua as Messiah does not cause a cessation of one's Jewishness, anymore than the accepting of Rabbi Schneerson of Brooklyn as Messiah makes those who believe it "no longer Jewish". It's absurd to randomly declare that real Jews can only pick among these possible Messiahs, but not others, while giving no criteria or reasoning. You still have not explained why a Jewish person cannot believe Yeshua is the Messiah.

Last edited by Ragtime on 19 Mar 2008, 9:51 am, edited 1 time in total.

It's funny that you're trying to be so accusatory. Because Christians do a lot worse, like apply context to verses that don't apply and aren't even related and make things up out of thin air and claim they're from the bible. Anyways, all sentences are subject to interpretation, even all of yours, and all of mine. Different people will read it and understand it differently.



One that hasn't arrived yet.



There will only be one true messiah, he hasn't arrived yet. There have been many false prophets, many failed messiahs, and Jesus fits nicely among these. Better than any other to date, maybe, but still far short.



Jews do not accept Jesus as the messiah because:

1) Jesus did not fulfill the messianic prophecies.

2) Jesus did not embody the personal qualifications of the Messiah.

3) Biblical verses "referring" to Jesus are mistranslations.

4) Jewish belief is based on national revelation.

But first, some background: What exactly is the Messiah?

The word "Messiah" is an English rendering of the Hebrew word "Mashiach", which means "Anointed." It usually refers to a person initiated into God's service by being anointed with oil. (Exodus 29:7, I Kings 1:39, II Kings 9:3)

Since every King and High Priest was anointed with oil, each may be referred to as "an anointed one" (a Mashiach or a Messiah). For example: "God forbid that I [David] should stretch out my hand against the Lord's Messiah [Saul]..." (I Samuel 26:11. Cf. II Samuel 23:1, Isaiah 45:1, Psalms 20:6)

Where does the Jewish concept of Messiah come from? One of the central themes of Biblical prophecy is the promise of a future age of perfection characterized by universal peace and recognition of God. (Isaiah 2:1-4; Zephaniah 3:9; Hosea 2:20-22; Amos 9:13-15; Isaiah 32:15-18, 60:15-18; Micah 4:1-4; Zechariah 8:23, 14:9; Jeremiah 31:33-34)

Many of these prophetic passages speak of a descendant of King David who will rule Israel during the age of perfection. (Isaiah 11:1-9; Jeremiah 23:5-6, 30:7-10, 33:14-16; Ezekiel 34:11-31, 37:21-28; Hosea 3:4-5)

Since every King is a Messiah, by convention, we refer to this future anointed king as The Messiah. The above is the only description in the Bible of a Davidic descendant who is to come in the future. We will recognize the Messiah by seeing who the King of Israel is at the time of complete universal perfection.

1. JESUS DID NOT FULFILL THE MESSIANIC PROPHECIES

What is the Messiah supposed to accomplish? The Bible says that he will:

A. Build the Third Temple (Ezekiel 37:26-28).

B. Gather all Jews back to the Land of Israel (Isaiah 43:5-6).

C. Usher in an era of world peace, and end all hatred, oppression, suffering and disease. As it says: "Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall man learn war anymore." (Isaiah 2:4)

D. Spread universal knowledge of the God of Israel, which will unite humanity as one. As it says: "God will be King over all the world -- on that day, God will be One and His Name will be One" (Zechariah 14:9).

If an individual fails to fulfill even one of these conditions, then he cannot be "The Messiah."

Because no one has ever fulfilled the Bible's description of this future King, Jews still await the coming of the Messiah. All past Messianic claimants, including Jesus of Nazareth, Bar Cochba and Shabbtai Tzvi have been rejected.

Christians counter that Jesus will fulfill these
in the Second Coming, but Jewish sources show that the Messiah will fulfill the prophecies outright; in the Bible no concept of a second coming exists.

________________________

2) JESUS DID NOT EMBODY THE PERSONAL QUALIFICATIONS OF MESSIAH

A. MESSIAH AS PROPHET

The Messiah will become the greatest prophet in history, second only to Moses. (Targum - Isaiah 11:2; Maimonides - Yad Teshuva 9:2)

Prophecy can only exist in Israel when the land is inhabited by a majority of world Jewry, a situation which has not existed since 300 BCE. During the time of Ezra, when the majority of Jews refused to move from Babylon to Israel, prophecy ended upon the death of the last prophets -- Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi.

Jesus was not a prophet; he appeared on the scene approximately 350 years after prophecy had ended.

B. DESCENDENT OF DAVID

According to Jewish sources, the Messiah will be born of human parents and possess normal physical attributes like other people. He will not be a demi-god, (1) nor will he possess supernatural qualities.

The Messiah must be descended on his father's side from King David (see Genesis 49:10, Isaiah 11:1, Jeremiah 23:5, 33:17; Ezekiel 34:23-24). According to the Christian claim that Jesus was the product of a virgin birth, he had no father -- and thus could not have possibly fulfilled the messianic requirement of being descended on his father's side from King David. (2)

C. TORAH OBSERVANCE

The Messiah will lead the Jewish people to full Torah observance. The Torah states that all mitzvot remain binding forever, and anyone coming to change the Torah is immediately identified as a false prophet. (Deut. 13:1-4)

Throughout the New Testament, Jesus contradicts the Torah and states that its commandments are no longer applicable. For example, John 9:14 records that Jesus made a paste in violation of Shabbat, which caused the Pharisees to say (verse 16), "He does not observe Shabbat!"

____________________

3) MISTRANSLATED VERSES "REFERRING" TO JESUS

Biblical verses can only be understood by studying the original Hebrew text -- which reveals many discrepancies in the Christian translation.

A. VIRGIN BIRTH

The Christian idea of a virgin birth is derived from the verse in Isaiah 7:14 describing an "alma" as giving birth. The word "alma" has always meant a young woman, but Christian theologians came centuries later and translated it as "virgin." This accords Jesus' birth with the first century pagan idea of mortals being impregnated by gods.

B. SUFFERING SERVANT

Christianity claims that Isaiah chapter 53 refers to Jesus, as the "suffering servant."

In actuality, Isaiah 53 directly follows the theme of chapter 52, describing the exile and redemption of the Jewish people. The prophecies are written in the singular form because the Jews ("Israel") are regarded as one unit. Throughout Jewish scripture, Israel is repeatedly called, in the singular, the "Servant of God" (see Isaiah 43:8). In fact, Isaiah states no less than 11 times in the chapters prior to 53 that the Servant of God is Israel. When read correctly, Isaiah 53 clearly [and ironically] refers to the Jewish people being "bruised, crushed and as sheep brought to slaughter" at the hands of the nations of the world. These descriptions are used throughout Jewish scripture to graphically describe the suffering of the Jewish people (see Psalm 44). Isaiah 53 concludes that when the Jewish people are redeemed, the nations will recognize and accept responsibility for the inordinate suffering and death of the Jews.

For further reading, go to: http://www.jewsforjudaism.org/web/faq/faq-ss.html

______________________

4) JEWISH BELIEF IS BASED SOLELY ON NATIONAL REVELATION

Throughout history, thousands of religions have been started by individuals, attempting to convince people that he or she is God's true prophet. But personal revelation is an extremely weak basis for a religion because one can never know if it is indeed true. Since others did not hear God speak to this person, they have to take his word for it. Even if the individual claiming personal revelation performs miracles, there is still no verification that he is a genuine prophet. Miracles do not prove anything. All they show -- assuming they are genuine -- is that he has certain powers. It has nothing to do with his claim of prophecy.

Judaism, unique among all of the world's major religions, does not rely on "claims of miracles" as the basis for its religion. In fact, the Bible says that God sometimes grants the power of "miracles" to charlatans, in order to test Jewish loyalty to the Torah (Deut. 13:4).

Of the thousands of religions in human history, only Judaism bases its belief on national revelation -- i.e. God speaking to the entire nation. If God is going to start a religion, it makes sense He'll tell everyone, not just one person.

Maimonides states (Foundations of Torah, ch. :

The Jews did not believe in Moses, our teacher, because of the miracles he performed. Whenever anyone's belief is based on seeing miracles, he has lingering doubts, because it is possible the miracles were performed through magic or sorcery. All of the miracles performed by Moses in the desert were because they were necessary, and not as proof of his prophecy.

What then was the basis of [Jewish] belief? The Revelation at Mount Sinai, which we saw with our own eyes and heard with our own ears, not dependent on the testimony of others... as it says, "Face to face, God spoke with you..." The Torah also states: "God did not make this covenant with our fathers, but with us -- who are all here alive today." (Deut. 5:3)

Judaism is not miracles. It is the personal eyewitness experience of every man, woman and child, standing at Mount Sinai 3,300 years ago.

For further reading: "Did God Speak at Mount Sinai?"

WAITING FOR THE MESSIAH

The world is in desperate need of Messianic redemption. And to the extent we are aware of the problems of society, is the extent we will yearn for redemption. As the Talmud says, one of the first questions asked of a Jew on Judgment Day is: "Did you yearn for the arrival of the Messiah?"

How can we hasten the coming of the Messiah? The best way is to love all humanity generously, to keep the mitzvot of the Torah (as best we can), and to encourage others to do so as well.

Despite the gloom, the world does seem headed toward redemption. One apparent sign is that the Jewish people have returned to the Land of Israel and made it bloom again. Additionally, a major movement is afoot of young Jews returning to Torah tradition.

The Messiah can come any day, and it all depends on our actions. God is ready when we are. For as King David says: "Redemption will come today -- if you hearken to His voice."

For further study visit: Jews for Judaism

See also:

"You Are My Witness: The Traditional Jewish Response to Christian Missionaries" A booklet in pdf format by Yisroel C. Blumenthal

"The Real Messiah," by Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan

"The Path of the Righteous Gentile," by Chaim Clorfene and Yakov Rogalsky

FOOTNOTES

1.Maimonides devotes much of the "Guide for the Perplexed" to the fundamental idea that God is incorporeal, meaning that He assumes no physical form. God is Eternal, above time. He is Infinite, beyond space. He cannot be born, and cannot die. Saying that God assumes human form makes God small, diminishing both His unity and His divinity. As the Torah says: "God is not a mortal" (Numbers 23:19).

2. In response, it is claimed that Joseph adopted Jesus, and passed on his genealogy via adoption. There are two problems with this claim:

a) There is no Biblical basis for the idea of a father passing on his tribal line by adoption. A priest who adopts a son from another tribe cannot make him a priest by adoption;

b) Joseph could never pass on by adoption that which he doesn't have. Because Joseph descended from Jeconiah (Matthew 1:11) he fell under the curse of that king that none of his descendants could ever sit as king upon the throne of David. (Jeremiah 22:30; 36:30)

To answer this difficult problem, apologists claim that Jesus traces himself back to King David through his mother Mary, who allegedly descends from David, as shown in the third chapter of Luke. There are four basic problems with this claim:

a) There is no evidence that Mary descends from David. The third chapter of Luke traces Joseph's genealogy, not Mary's.

b) Even if Mary can trace herself back to David, that doesn't help Jesus, since tribal affiliation goes only through the father, not mother. Cf. Numbers 1:18; Ezra 2:59.

c) Even if family line could go through the mother, Mary was not from a legitimate Messianic family. According to the Bible, the Messiah must be a descendent of David through his son Solomon (II Samuel 7:14; I Chronicles 17:11-14, 22:9-10, 28:4-6). The third chapter of Luke is irrelevant to this discussion because it describes lineage of David's son Nathan, not Solomon. (Luke 3:31)

d) Luke 3:27 lists Shealtiel and Zerubbabel in his genealogy. These two also appear in Matthew 1:12 as descendants of the cursed Jeconiah. If Mary descends from them, it would also disqualify her from being a Messianic progenitor.

Correct, and that is why the Messiah is referred to in Genesis 3:15 as the woman's seed, contra tradition.

"And I will put enmity Between you and the woman, And between your seed and her seed; He shall bruise you on the head, And you shall bruise him on the heel" (Genesis 3:15).

This verse is known as the protevangelion, meaning “The First Gospel”.

In this verse the woman is the historical Eve, but the enmity between "you" (the serpent) and the woman involves all mankind. Of course "you", the serpent in the preceding verses, is Satan. Satan’s seed represents his agents throughout history. The Seed of the woman is the Messiah, Yeshua. The woman’s Seed would utterly and decisively defeat the serpent by one blow to the head, meaning a mortal wound delivered to Satan and sin. This critical wound was delivered at Calvary, at the crucifixion, when Yeshua triumphed over the devil by His death on behalf of all mankind.

The Devil would bruise the Messiah’s heel, bringing on suffering, even death. But it would not be a defeat, since Christ rose from the dead victorious over death, sin, hell and Satan.

Jesus is called the woman’s seed, even though it was customary in Jewish literature and culture to refer to only male ancestors, or at least to both the male and female progenitors, when discussing genealogy. This phrase, of someone being the seed of a woman only, is most unusual. Later, Jesus’ virgin birth would give meaning to this verse and show that indeed, it was a prophecy of that far future event.

The website at your first link attempts to reduce the profound and sweeping prophetic declarations about the Messiah in the beginning of Genesis to "People don't like snakes". Ya, that's what God really wants us to know. If you think the Scriptures are so Confucian in their simplemindedness, it's no wonder you don't reverence them enough to believe them without rabbis injecting modern interpretations into the original texts.



There is a very good explanation of this virgin birth prophecy here:
"Virgin" versus "young woman" in the Hebrew text of Isaiah 7:14

Well, I've answered more of your questions than you have of mine (the 45 prophecies I gave), so I'll leave it here for now.

Why are you posting entire webpages in my thread?

Just answer the original question:
Can a Jew believe in Yeshua without losing his identity, and why or why not?
Verbosity is no substitute for a precise answer and a clear, simple explanation.

For clarification, I meant to type "your rabbis", not "you rabbis". "You rabbis" would sound accusatory. I have edited and corrected that typo.

And it's true, many Christians do a bad job at applying verses, to be sure. I'm not claiming Christianity has a better general rate of correct Scriptural application, except in the field of interpreting verses more literally as they read, while modern Judaism, especially Reform, injects all kinds of brand-new and more palatable and pleasing meanings into the original text. Responsible Christians focus more on exegesis than on isogesis. The "make this verse fit my life" is the wrong approach. "What did this verse originally mean?" is the right approach to all scholarship.

Already answered in the webpage. That's a Jew answering it.



I'm glad you see things that way. You need to examine them webpages you proffered as the requirements of the messiah, as they are full of such. There's no point in my addressing all 45 as I'd have to show how each one is taken out of context and that would truly flood your thread with stuff I doubt you want it filled with, also I'm rather lazy and would rather spend my time doing something else.

So toodles.

Someone who is ethnically Jewish who converts to Christianity can still call themselves a Jew as far as I am concerned, because that is their race. However, the term "Jewish Christian" does not make sense the way "Christian Jew" does, because being those two religions at once is so contradictory. The core of Judaism is that the messiah will come. The core of Christianity is that the messiah has come.

In short, it makes sense ethnically but not theologically.

Yes, but my point is that a person can be a follower of first-century, "old school", Biblical Judaism -- not the modern, rabbinicized version that tries to adjust itself to be politically correct all the time -- and easily embrace all the tenets of Christianity. Christianity is, after all, a Jewish invention, and I'm speaking in the religious sense every bit as much as in the cultural and ethnic senses. Being a Christian means nothing other than subscribing to Biblical Judaism. Disagreements there will be, but it is wrong to say or imply that a person can't believe both the Old and New Testaments simulataneously. The Old Testament is the New concealed, and the New Testament is the Old revealed. The one flows naturally (or indeed, supernaturally) into the other.

Your mother should know topic

The terms Jewish and Christian are mutually exclusive. One is not synonymous with the other. If you want to artificially fuse them and create some sort of contrived definition, then do so. But this definition will not be realistically acceptable or accurate as there is a contradiction here. Amusing, though.

I am not with you on this one, ragtime. But good luck with your creative definitions!

This may be a stupid question, are Jewish Christians allowed to eat pork?
Just curious to know

I have to admit that I know more about Christian theology and how it has evolved than Jewish theology and how it has evolved. How, exactly, have attitudes toward gentiles changed in direct relation to our topic? I remember reading something Isaac Bashevis Singer wrote about how since WWII Jewish philosophy had been reduced to theories of how to usurp the gentile.

Christianity always struck me as something that was created as an extension of Judaism, also. However, Christianity as Jesus taught seems to set itself against traditional Jewish law (the only law Jesus ever set down was against divorce, which was allowed and common in Jewish society). It would be hard to take free-flowing early Christianity and stricter, more practical early Judaism at the same time.

Note:



I'm not looking for someone to parrot a common statement. You did it well, but it's not a real contribution to thought.
I am looking for evidence for either of the two suppositions I laid out.