One More Time: Why Jesus was not the Jewish Messiah

[cnorman18]

From some recent threads, it appears that its time to repost this yet again -- as usual, as an informational piece only. It first appeared, in a slightly different form, in late 2007. It was among my very first posts to this forum.

My usual caveats before I begin:

This post is NOT an attack on Christianity.

This post is intended to EXPLAIN some things that very many non-Jews, including many Christians but also including many others, apparently do not understand.

Jews, as a rule, do not comment on the truth or falsehood of any other faith, and that includes the Christian faith; we have no right. We only claim to know how, in the words of our tradition, God chose to speak to US. If He chose to speak to another people in another manner, that is no business of ours, and we have no warrant to say that He did not.

Asserting a belief in one tradition is NOT, in our view, a negation of all others, no matter how passionately others try to put those words in our mouths. We go our own way, and others may go theirs; we do not believe ours to be "the only true religion," as some others do, nor do we believe that one must be Jewish to be "saved." We truly have no such concept anyway, as will be seen presently.

This post is also not addressed to atheists. I have spoken on the radically different theology (insofar as it exists) of the Jewish religion elsewhere, and at length, and have many times noted the fact that very many Jews ARE atheists; but all of those issues, and the debates and discussions connected thereto, are not for this thread, and I will not be dealing with them here.

This post is on the rather more limited topic of why the Jews did not, and do not, and will not, accept Jesus as our Messiah.

That some few have, and do, does not matter, any more than the fact that very many Christians have converted to Judaism as well (I am one of them). People may choose to believe as they like; but that is not relevant here. The fact is that there are reasons why very few Jews who are familiar with and committed to their faith and tradition ever have, or ever will, believe in Jesus. This post is an effort to explain some of the most important of those reasons. If you do not agree with them, that is your right, but these matters are not, for Jews, open to debate or argument.

The core of this problem is that the office of Messiah, to Jews, and that of the Christ, to Christians, are two very different and virtually mutually exclusive things.

To begin, then: Jesus, to put it plainly, simply did not perform the very specific actions that the Messiah was expected to do. There can be no "wiggle room" here; the tradition has been constant for, quite literally, thousands of years, and it has not changed. It is true that most modern Jews are no longer much interested in the figure of the Messiah, and his importance has rather sunk into the background in recent centuries; but the concept, and the office, remains the same.

The issue was never that there were certain "prophecies" that the Messiah had to "fulfill," as many seem to think. Most of the prophecies which it is claimed that Jesus fulfilled were never considered prophecies by Jews in the first place, a fact which is easily confirmed by any good book on Judaism. The very term prophecy has a different meaning in the Jewish religion anyway; there, it is only occasionally related to foretelling the future, and even then generally only in the short term.

The Messiah was never to be identified by prophecy; he was to be identified by the PERFORMANCE of certain concrete, real-world actions. To do them was to be the Messiah, and the meaning of the word "Messiah" was "the man who does these things."

Jesus did not do them. He was not the Messiah. There is no "therefore," because the phrases are synonymous.

Jesus fulfilled one and only one attribute of the Messiah; he was of the tribe of Judah. Much is made of this in two of the Gospels, Matthew and Luke, with elaborate genealogies given for Mary, and, oddly, for Joseph.

Other than that, St. Paul and the Gospels to the contrary, Jesus did nothing expected of the Messiah. Three such expectations will suffice for our purposes:

The Messiah was to be a military and/or a political leader, an actual, rightful King who would restore the line of David to the throne of Israel and reign in Jerusalem as the actual, literal earthly monarch of the Jewish nation.

He would restore the political independence of the land of Israel and free it from foreign rule.

Most importantly, his coming would coincide with the beginning of a time of perfect peace, justice, liberty and piety that would shortly extend over all the earth -- in THIS world and THIS life, and not in a "symbolic" or spiritual way, but in literal, present human history. Whether he himself would bring about this "Messianic Age," or whether he would arrive after we humans ourselves have achieved it by our own efforts, has been a bone of contention among Jews for centuries. I, myself, do not claim to know.

This last is, as I say, the most important signifier of all; the Messiah would arrive with the Messianic Age. He was named for it, and it was named for him. The two would come together, or not at all. They were, and remain, one.

It seems rather clear that none of these occurred, and most glaringly the last, which was and has always been the most important sign and task of the Messiah. The short answer, for many Jews, to the question "Why don't you believe in Jesus?" is "Oy! Look around!" The world is not at peace; ergo, Messiah has not come. That's an end to the "debate," for most Jews.

And now we come to the nature of the Christian Christ, and the enormous differences between what is said of Jesus and the attributes of the Jewish Messiah.

Put simply: Jesus claimed (or it was claimed for him) that he had power and authority that no Jew could or would claim for any man, and power and authority far beyond any that were ever attributed to the coming Messiah. These claims were, and remain, alien to Judaism and are in fact often blasphemous from a Jewish point of view.

First, It was claimed that Jesus was God incarnate; that he, a human being, was, in fact and truth, God Almighty Himself in the flesh.

It would be hard to think of an idea more repugnant to Jews, then or now. The oldest and most fundamental and nonnegotiable tenet of Judaism is that God is One, which means a good deal more than "one God." Among other things, it means that God is unique and indivisible, and shares His Essence and Being with no one and nothing. He is Alone. He is One.

It was, therefore, and will remain, impossible for Jews to accept the claim that a man could be, in any sense, God. The Messiah was never conceived to be anything other than an ordinary mortal man; anointed by God, to be sure, but no more a God himself than King David was, the paradigmatic King in Jewish history and tradition. There is no hint of such a thing as a Divine Man anywhere in Jewish tradition, teaching or literature; it is about as likely as the High Priest carving a stone idol and placing it in the Holy of Holies. It was, and remains, quite literally unthinkable.

The one -- count em, ONE -- verse from Scripture (Isaiah 9:6) that is commonly given as proof that this notion DID have a part in Jewish tradition is, without apology, a gross misreading and mistranslation of the passage in question; and it is also, just as importantly, unique. The idea that such a radical departure from the ancient tenets of the Jewish religion would not be known and even heavily emphasized throughout Jewish teachings over the centuries, as opposed to appearing in one and only one verse of the Bible, is more than a little ludicrous. Basing the practice of snake-handling on one verse in Mark is positively reasonable and credible in comparison.

Second, Jesus was said to be the literal son of God. This was way beyond bizarre. The idea that the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, the God of Moses and Sinai, could or would come down to earth and father a human child on a human woman is as foreign to Judaism as temple prostitution. That is a Greek idea, not a Jewish one -- consider Zeus and Hercules -- and it may be no coincidence that Paul was speaking to Greeks, not Jews, when he formulated it. There has never been anything within a light-year of that idea anywhere in all the enormous tradition and long history of the Jewish people. It is, once again, unthinkable:

Third, Jesus claimed the power and authority to forgive sins.

All sins.

It may be more difficult to see why this is such a problem for Jews, because this is not widely known: In the Jewish religion, sins can only be forgiven by the person being sinned against. That means, among other things, that God Himself cannot forgive all sins. If I punch you in the nose, who is God to forgive me? That sin must be forgiven by you, and only you, or it is not to be forgiven at all. No one else has the right. God can forgive sins against Himself -- failures to honor vows, ritual "sins," and so on -- but not personal sins against other people.

This is why Jews do not generally respond to the observation that the Holocaust should be "forgiven." We, the Jews of the present day, have no right. As Elie Wiesel, himself a Holocaust survivor, once said: "Ask the six million for forgiveness."

By the same token, even Christians, I think, often feel a certain revulsion when some convicted murderer taunts his victim's family with "God has forgiven me; why can't you?" I think most people instinctively feel that claim to be fraudulent and self-serving, not to mention hypocritical, even if they dont share our belief.

By claiming the authority to forgive ALL sins, Jesus was not claiming to be coequal with God; he was claiming to be greater than God. No wonder some tore their robes and cried Blasphemy! when they heard him speak.

Fourth, as if all this were not enough: It was claimed that Jesus took on a role that had never been contemplated by any Jew from Abraham onward, a role that was not necessary and was, again, alien to the whole of Jewish teachings and traditions from the beginning to the present day; That role was that of Savior. it is claimed that Jesus was the sacrifice that saves all men from their sins, and that this salvation is accessed by believing in him, and nothing more.

This seems simple; but for Jews, there are no less than six separate problems here.

First, the idea that people need to be saved from their sins in the first place. Jews have never believed in "Original Sin," nor that all people are born sinful. We believe that everyone has an impulse to do good, and an impulse to do evil, and that these remain with us all our lives; our job is to follow the first and resist (or redirect) the second to the best of our ability.

Second, St. Paul to the contrary, Jews have never taught, nor do we believe, that we are obligated to fulfill "the whole of the Law" or face eternal damnation. We believe that, since God made us, He knows our imperfection and our weakness, and does not demand that we be perfect and without fault or flaw. That would be the act of an unjust God, and we do not believe that God is unjust.

Third, Jews do not believe that any human can bear the sins of another. That principle is underlined in the Torah over and over again. Each man bears his own sins, and that cannot be changed. Sins are forgiven through prayer, repentance, and deeds of lovingkindness. No blood is necessary.

Fourth, we do not believe that a "sacrifice" is necessary to obtain forgiveness for sins, whether animal or human (and the idea of a human sacrifice is so far from any Jewish belief or practice that it is barely comprehensible that anyone would even propose it as a possibility). It is true that animal sacrifices were performed in the Tabernacle and later in the Temple, but it is clear throughout the Torah and the Prophets that the sacrifice itself was meaningless without the repentance and devotion of the individual human heart.

Fifth, in Judaism, "belief" accomplishes precisely nothing by itself. There is no Creed in Judaism, no specified set of acceptable beliefs. What one "believes" is all but insignificant next to what one does, and no amount of "belief" cancels or ameliorates the results of one's actions. Believing the proper "doctrines" in Judaism is utterly irrelevant to anything at all.

A concrete example, put simply: if I am in need, what do I care what you "believe"? Will you help me, or not? Nothing else matters.

Sixth, Jews are not even certain that there is a Heaven at all. Judaism has rather little concern with the afterlife; it is not mentioned in the Torah, and belief in it seems to have been entirely absent from its teachings in the early years of our religion. Even those Jews who do believe in Heaven spend little time or energy thinking and talking about it -- and there is no belief in an eternal fiery Hell at all, anywhere in all of Jewish history or tradition. The focus of the Jewish religion is THIS life, in THIS world. The next, we leave to God. Salvation, in the Christian sense of going to Heaven, is a non-issue for Jews. It is not even a peripheral interest, let alone a central principle.

As you can see, though Judaism and Christianity share an ethic, basic values, and many religious practices, as well as (in part) common literature, our views of the nature and structure of the relationship between God and man, the nature and importance of sin and the means of its forgiveness, the significance of the afterlife, and many other matters, are so profoundly different that they really do constitute two entirely separate religions.

That one was derived from the other, and that we share a large body of Scripture, no longer matters. We stand beside each other as brothers; but we have long since taken separate paths. We ought to respect one another and work together where our ideals and ethics converge in the real world -- which is almost everywhere. Where our beliefs differ, we should agree to disagree and leave each other alone, because there can be no reconciliation there.

One more note: It is wholly illegitimate and improper for a follower of any faith to attempt to dictate to a follower of another what his beliefs OUGHT to be, then castigate him because they do not follow his prescription. No one has any warrant to point out passages of "prophecy" in our own Scriptures that we do not, and have never, read as such, and overrule the traditions and beliefs that we have held for more than three thousand years--and tell us what we ought to think and believe. No one has that right; not you, not your Church, not Jesus himself.

To Christians: This caveat applies in both directions. We have no warrant to tell YOU how to read the Bible, either; you may read the Hebrew Bible, which you have adopted as your Old Testament, in any way you choose. We also have no warrant to deny that Jesus is your Savior, or to deny that, for you, any belief you may hold about him is true. That is between you and God, and is none of our business; for all any Jew knows, those beliefs are true and correct for Christians and God will honor them. Jesus may very well be YOUR Messiah, even though he is not ours. That is not for us to say.

But in the same way, it is not your right to insist that we abandon our own beliefs and convictions in favor of an understanding of our own Scriptures that we have never held. As I say; this matter is not open to debate. This determination was made by my people two thousand years ago, and it has been reaffirmed in every generation.

If anybody is planning to post a point-by-point attempt at refuting all this, complete with a whole raft of "proof texts" from the Bible -- Old OR New Testament -- it will be a waste of your time. It won't be a waste of mine, because I've seen them all before, and I'll be declining to "debate." Others may choose to respond, which is fine, but for my part, I'll just refer you to this website, where you will find all the information you need.

If anyone wishes to DISCUSS these things, on the other hand, I'd be glad to participate. But don't try to convince me, as so many have, that Judaism actually, really does teach that Jesus was the true Messiah. That argument entails one of two, and only two, corollaries, you see; (1) that Jews are too stupid to understand their own religion and have been for 2,000 years, or (2) that we all secretly know that Jesus was our Messiah and have simply been lying about it. Both of those claims are insulting, demeaning, and grossly offensive to Jews, and are therefore by definition antisemitic. Don't go there.

I'll close with a saying from the Talmud that, I would hope, indicates a way to peace. When the sages of old disagreed and could find no way to reconcile their differences, they would often allow both rulings to stand as equally acceptable options in Jewish law. When asked how this was possible, it was said that "When Elijah comes, he will explain which of us was right -- or why we both were."

In that spirit, I'll offer this: I have said for many years that, when (if) the Messiah finally comes, the Jews will look up and say, Youre here! the Christians will look up and say, Youre back! -- and then well all hug each other and laugh about it.

Peace to all.

[The Me's]

Please demonstrate this. I rather suspect you are assuming that the modern Christian interpretations of certain passages in Tanakh are correct, rather than the Jewish interpretations.

The New Testament is a Jewish interpretation of OT messianic prophecies.

I couldn't care less how modern Christians interpret; they're welcome to their opinions as well. I read the OT for what it says, not what it doesn't say, and I can only tell you that I usually see Jews watering down their own scripture and showing preference to the Talmud over the Tenakh.

[cnorman18]

Please demonstrate this. I rather suspect you are assuming that the modern Christian interpretations of certain passages in Tanakh are correct, rather than the Jewish interpretations.

The New Testament is a Jewish interpretation of OT messianic prophecies.

Sorry, but that's patently ridiculous. It is the CHRISTIAN interpretation of passages that CHRISTIANS claim are "Messianic prophecies." To call the New Testament in any sense a "Jewish" document is analogous to saying that the Quran is a Christian one. It doesn't matter if SOME of the men who wrote it were born Jewish; once one believes in Jesus as God Incarnate and Savior, one has stopped practicing the Jewish religion and is now a Christian. The same applies to "Messianic Jews" today -- even though most who claim that title were never Jews in any sense at all.

I couldn't care less how modern Christians interpret; they're welcome to their opinions as well. I read the OT for what it says, not what it doesn't say, and I can only tell you that I usually see Jews watering down their own scripture and showing preference to the Talmud over the Tenakh.

Do you even know the difference between the Torah and the Tanakh? Do you understand that difference? How much of the Talmud have you actually READ?

Sorry, but your ignorance of Jewish teachings is clear to anyone who is informed about my religion, and you have neither the knowledge, or anything close to the authority, to make the arrogant and pontifical pronouncements you are making here. Jews get to decide what Jews believe, not Gentiles. Period.

Have a nice day.

[The Me's]

Please demonstrate this. I rather suspect you are assuming that the modern Christian interpretations of certain passages in Tanakh are correct, rather than the Jewish interpretations.

The New Testament is a Jewish interpretation of OT messianic prophecies.

Sorry, but that's patently ridiculous.

Jesus was Jewish.
Paul was Jewish.
Matthew was Jewish.
Mark was Jewish.
John was Jewish.
Peter was Jewish.
Jude was Jewish.
James was Jewish.

I don't know what your problem is, but the NT is rather obviously Jewish.

(Oh wait--YOU think Luke was responsible for it all, don't you?)

[cnorman18]

[Replying to post 53 by The Me's]

If you think the New Testament is Jewish, I don't think we have anything more to talk about. I notice that you deleted and had no comment on the rest of my post....

Like I said: Since you very clearly know nothing whatever about Jewish teachings, Jewish history, the Talmud and its place in Jewish belief and study, and least of all about the Torah (e.g. that we read from the Torah, in Hebrew, three times a week and read it through every year), I don't think your baseless, uninformed and unsupported opinions are worth my time any more. You have very clearly never read so much as an informative article about Judaism that was actually written by a practicing Jew, never mind actually have read a real, live BOOK on the subject.

I'll bet you don't even know what the Talmud looks like!

Have a nice day.

[The Me's]

If you think the New Testament is Jewish, I don't think we have anything more to talk about.

The NT is Jewish whether you want it to be or not.

I'm so glad I'm a Christian. I have the advantage of letting reality be whatever it wants to be and I don't have to lie about it to feel comfortable. I can let the Bible say whatever it says without my input.

Life is easier that way.

[Nickman]

If you think the New Testament is Jewish, I don't think we have anything more to talk about.

The NT is Jewish whether you want it to be or not.

I'm so glad I'm a Christian. I have the advantage of letting reality be whatever it wants to be and I don't have to lie about it to feel comfortable. I can let the Bible say whatever it says without my input.

Life is easier that way.

Well, that was a round about way to completely agree with everything Charles said about your ignorance on Jewish Culture. At least just admit it to yourself.

[The Me's]

If you think the New Testament is Jewish, I don't think we have anything more to talk about.

The NT is Jewish whether you want it to be or not.

I'm so glad I'm a Christian. I have the advantage of letting reality be whatever it wants to be and I don't have to lie about it to feel comfortable. I can let the Bible say whatever it says without my input.

Life is easier that way.

Well, that was a round about way to completely agree with everything Charles said about your ignorance on Jewish Culture. At least just admit it to yourself.

Be careful what you admit to in public.

Everyone is watching.

It would be unfortunate if you did something silly like claim that the characters in the New Testament, and the writers of the books, were something other than Jewish.

Wait. I know. They were RUSSIANS!! I KNEW IT!!

[Nickman]

If you think the New Testament is Jewish, I don't think we have anything more to talk about.

The NT is Jewish whether you want it to be or not.

I'm so glad I'm a Christian. I have the advantage of letting reality be whatever it wants to be and I don't have to lie about it to feel comfortable. I can let the Bible say whatever it says without my input.

Life is easier that way.

Well, that was a round about way to completely agree with everything Charles said about your ignorance on Jewish Culture. At least just admit it to yourself.

Be careful what you admit to in public.

Everyone is watching.

It would be unfortunate if you did something silly like claim that the characters in the New Testament, and the writers of the books, were something other than Jewish.

Wait. I know. They were RUSSIANS!! I KNEW IT!!

Hellenized Jews they were. Deeply rooted in Greek and Roman Culture. You don't see the evolution of the Jewish culture through their captivity?

[Paul2]

Third, Jesus claimed the power and authority to forgive sins.

All sins.

I disagree:

Mt 6:15 Yet if you should not be forgiving men their offenses, neither will your Father be forgiving your offenses.

Yeshua (Jesus) had no authority to forgive the above sin of refusing to forgive others and would not have claimed he had that authority and did not claim to have the authority to forgive all sins.

[cnorman18]

The issue was made quite clear in Luke 5:

20 When Jesus saw their faith, he said, Friend, your sins are forgiven.

21 The Pharisees and the teachers of the law began thinking to themselves, Who is this fellow who speaks blasphemy? Who can forgive sins but God alone?

22 Jesus knew what they were thinking and asked, Why are you thinking these things in your hearts? 23 Which is easier: to say, Your sins are forgiven, or to say, Get up and walk? 24 But I want you to know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins. So he said to the paralyzed man, I tell you, get up, take your mat and go home. 25 Immediately he stood up in front of them, took what he had been lying on and went home praising God. 26 Everyone was amazed and gave praise to God. They were filled with awe and said, We have seen remarkable things today.

"The authority to forgive sins" was precisely the issue to the "teachers of the Law" and the Pharisees here, and where Jewish teachings are concerned, they were right. If Christians choose to believe that Jesus had this authority, I'm OK with that; but Jews don't believe that a man -- ANY man -- could be God or hold God's power or authoritY, whether he could heal people or not.