Why Jesus was not the Jewish Messiah

[cnorman18]

This is a reedited version of one of my first posts on this forum, from five years ago. I think it bears repeating.

A word before I begin:

This post is NOT an attack on Christianity; nor is this post an invitation to debate. This post is intended to EXPLAIN something that very many non-Jews, including many Christians but also including many others, do not, apparently, 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. Only in the matter of literally worshiping idols as divine beings do we pronounce judgment, and that is rather rare in the modern world.

The battle has never been between Christians and Jews, anyway. We are on the same side. On the other side are today's idol-worshippers -- those who worship things; money, power, fame, gratification, status. May we both always remember that.

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 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, accept Jesus as our Messiah.

That some few have, and do, does not matter. Peace to them, but 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.

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.

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 (the very term has a different meaning in the Jewish religion, which is only occasionally related to “foretelling the future�). 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: (1) 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. (2) He would restore the political independence of the land of Israel and free it from foreign rule. (3) Most importantly, he would institute a reign of perfect peace, justice, liberty and piety that would shortly extend over all the earth -- in THIS world and THIS life; not in a symbolic or “spiritual� way, but in literal, present human history. This last is, as I say, the most important task of all; the Messiah would institute 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 Messiah has not come.

Another issue is that 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 are alien to Judaism, and in fact often blasphemous from a Jewish point of view. It was even claimed that Jesus was God incarnate, that a human being was, in fact and truth, God Almighty Himself.

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 would be easier for Jews to begin chowing down on ham-and-Swiss sandwiches on Yom Kippur than 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. There is no hint of such a thing in any Jewish tradition; 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 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 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 is more than a little ludicrous.)

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 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, again, unthinkable:

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

All sins.

Now this is more difficult, because this is not widely known: Jews do not believe that God Himself has that power. God can forgive sins against Himself--ritual offenses, broken vows, and so on--but no more; a sin against another human must be forgiven by that person, or not at all. (This is why there can be no forgiveness for murder. The only one with the power to forgive is dead. This is also why the Jews of today cannot "forgive" the Holocaust. You must ask the six million for that forgiveness; we have no right to give it.)

By claiming this power, Jesus was not claiming to be coequal with God, but in fact greater than God. No wonder some tore their robes when they heard him speak.

And again, 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 -- the role 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 it.

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 isn't 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 point 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.

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.

We 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 is reaffirmed in every generation.

Thank you for reading. May we all work together for the good of the Kingdom of God and forgive each other our disagreements.

I'll close with a saying from the Talmud. 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 also offer this: I have said for many years that, when (if) the Messiah finally comes, the Jews will look up and say, “You’re here!� the Christians will look up and say, “You’re back!� -- and then we’ll all hug each other and laugh about it.

Peace to all.

Charles

[fwbbeliever]

Thanks for your response.
I am curious. How do Jews view references to the Son of God in the Old Testament such as Daniel 3:25 and Psalm 2 or are Jews familiar with these?

Daniel 3:25 He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.

Psalms 2:11-12
11 Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling.
12 Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.

[Goat]

Thanks for your response.
I am curious. How do Jews view references to the Son of God in the Old Testament such as Daniel 3:25 and Psalm 2 or are Jews familiar with these?

Daniel 3:25 He answered and said, Lo, I see four men loose, walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt; and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God.

Psalms 2:11-12
11 Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling.
12 Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him.

Well, if you look in the Hebrew, .. Psalm 2:12 says
'Pay homage in good faith, lest he be angry"..> Nothing at all about 'the son'.

This is known as a 'Mistranslation to make it appear to be about Jesus'


And Daniel 3:25 is 25. He called out and said, "Behold, I see four free men walking in the midst of the fire, and there is no wound upon them, and the form of the fourth one is like [that of] an angel."

Here is a Jewish interpretation, with the commentary of a Rashi, a 11th century Rabbi. .. the commentary predates the earliest English translations.
http://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo ... rashi/true

Translation is interpretation, and quite often. Christian translators sort of massage the translation to make it appear to be about Jesus.

[cnorman18]

Suppose I have only met ten Jews locally where I live.
they can be 20 or more but I only remember that ten of them
admitted them had that heritage. Few of these where believers
they where cultural Jews that kept their culture but I don't
remember them talking about their faith other than indirectly
in relation to traditions like not having Christmas.

It's rather rare for Jews to freely discuss religion outside of the community. A few centuries of misunderstanding and distortion have pretty much trained that out of us. I'm very much an exception to that general rule.

Most Jews I met where active Socialists or Communists
so that can explain their toned down expressions of faith?

No need to "tone it down" -- "Faith" has never been the focus of the Jewish religion; it's always been more about ethics and right actions than beliefs. Jews have generally been on the side of "reform" in society for that very reason, and at the turn of the 20th century, especially in Eastern Europe, where most Jews lived, that meant socialism and/or communism. Most Jews are social liberals today in the US, and therefore Democrats (about 70% voted for Obama in November).

But one did take her religion seriously so she took me
to the Jewish School and the synagog and to her family
and showed them wanting her to marry an Orthodox Jew
and not a Christian Atheist Worked real good I wished her
luck to find that guy to marry.

Intermarriage is a concern and a controversy among Jews today; it always has been, and it's not about prejudice, or at least not only about prejudice; it's about the survival of the community. We lose about half (as in 50%) of every generation to assimilation, which often begins with intermarriage. Old Jewish joke: "What do you call the grandchildren of intermarried Jews?" "Christians."

Now reading your first text I am surprised how little I knew
about Jew views on religion so I can understand your motivation
to share it with us.

Thanks.

Jews share with Muslim/Islam that Jesus is not a God.
Could Islam have been inspired by Jewish believers?

Beats me. I don't know enough about Islam to say, but I doubt that. Certainly there was influence.

Islam seems to start with Abraham being same Father to them?

That is correct. Where Jews believe that we are descended from Isaac, Abraham's second son, Arabs (and Muslims) believe that they are descended from Ishmael, his firstborn. Both cultures seem to agree on that.

Both Jew and Muslim is very different to our culture where I live.
Both are discriminated against and them have problem accepting
each other too?

That hasn't always been the case. Jews and Muslims lived together in peace for centuries; indeed, 12th-century Muslim Spain is still considered our historical "Golden Age." The enmity between our religions in the present day is a tragedy.

That God chose to relate to Jews in this very special way
and if one read Muslims take on Allah they seems to say
them are very special in the eyes of Allah and Christians
seems to see God's work through Jesus Christ as very special too?

Three religions that all of them see themselves as very special?

That's above my pay grade. I know what God "said" (according to the tradition) to us; what He may have said to others, I don't claim to know. I DO know that we Jews don't consider our religion the One True Religion or the only right one; we say that it's right for Jews.

And do these three get along well with each other?
Could there be a relation between having a special relation
to God and that one have problem getting along?

Not on OUR part. We have no argument with anyone else's religion; not our business.

From my naive perspective the future looks very bleak or pessimistic?

When in human history has it not looked that way? We seem to muddle on regardless, doing the best we can. I suspect it will always be that way.

How can one get these three religions to reconsider their take on God
as making them very exclusive instead of inclusive of each other?

Like I said, that's been the Jewish point of view for centuries. Islam and Christianity (at least the fundamentalist versions) claim to be the One True Faith. Judaism doesn't. If it's not our problem, it's not ours to solve.

To me from outside it does look as if it is the same God so
why not get along better having same god? Is it not odd?
Or is that to expect that if one have same God that is the sure way
to forever compete with each other for to be the most special to God.

I don't think God cares much about what we BELIEVE. I think He cares about what we DO, and that's the Jewish attitude and has been for at least two thousand years.

"That which is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor: that is the whole Torah. The rest is commentary."
--Hillel, a Jewish teacher of the 1st century BCE

[ndf8th]

Thanks for you answer.
I think I agree that Jesus was not the Jewish Messiah.
Could there have been a sect within Jewish community
that where more Gostic and them somehow inspired
what later became the Christian faith?

Essene or something. The Dead Sea Scrolls
seems to be about a group that had very particular
views on the Teacher and that person seems to have
some similarity with views on Jesus? Maybe he inspired
to such views. Not standard Jew views but a sect that
isolated themselves?

[cnorman18]

Thanks for you answer.
I think I agree that Jesus was not the Jewish Messiah.
Could there have been a sect within Jewish community
that where more Gostic and them somehow inspired
what later became the Christian faith?

Essene or something. The Dead Sea Scrolls
seems to be about a group that had very particular
views on the Teacher and that person seems to have
some similarity with views on Jesus? Maybe he inspired
to such views. Not standard Jew views but a sect that
isolated themselves?

Honestly, at this late date it's impossible to tell. If I remember correctly, no one even knew that the Essenes existed till the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered. There do seem to be some similarities, but those could be as much coincidence as influence.

There was probably a real historical Jesus (though many here fiercely resist that idea); but what he actually did and taught -- that's hard to say beyond speculation. There is as much of Paul in the Gospels as Jesus (his letters are much older), and perhaps more. What is certain is that much of Christian thought and teaching is more Greek than Jewish. That doesn't make it false, but it does mean that the orig

[cnorman18]

Thanks for you answer.
I think I agree that Jesus was not the Jewish Messiah.
Could there have been a sect within Jewish community
that where more Gostic and them somehow inspired
what later became the Christian faith?

Essene or something. The Dead Sea Scrolls
seems to be about a group that had very particular
views on the Teacher and that person seems to have
some similarity with views on Jesus? Maybe he inspired
to such views. Not standard Jew views but a sect that
isolated themselves?

Honestly, at this late date it's impossible to tell. If I remember correctly, no one even knew that the Essenes existed till the Dead Sea Scrolls were discovered. There do seem to be some similarities, but those could be as much coincidence as influence.

There was probably a real historical Jesus (though many here fiercely resist that idea); but what he actually did and taught -- that's hard to say beyond speculation. There is as much of Paul in the Gospels as Jesus (his letters are much older), and perhaps more. What is certain is that much of Christian thought and teaching is more Greek than Jewish. That doesn't make it false, but it does mean that the origins of Christianity are more complex than is usually acknowledged. As I say, at this late date it's realistically impossible to say much more than that.

The opinions of others will vary, of course. This is merely mine.

[ndf8th]

What about modern Jewish reconstructionists like Mordecai Kaplan?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mordecai_Kaplan

Is it not very reasonable to predict that any religious tradition
may have had persons like him. I know nothing about the Dead Sea Scolls
or the Essenes but suppose they had persons like Kaplan in them
that wanted to reconstruct Jewish faith?

Like today them being a minority view the Essenes most likely a minority too.
Jesus could have been a drop out from their group? Just trying to find answers.

Not important I only wild guess.

[cnorman18]

What about modern Jewish reconstructionists like Mordecai Kaplan?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mordecai_Kaplan

Is it not very reasonable to predict that any religious tradition
may have had persons like him. I know nothing about the Dead Sea Scolls
or the Essenes but suppose they had persons like Kaplan in them
that wanted to reconstruct Jewish faith?

Like today them being a minority view the Essenes most likely a minority too.
Jesus could have been a drop out from their group? Just trying to find answers.

Not important I only wild guess.

Sure, that's possible. Jesus has even been called "the first Reform Jew." Wild guesses are all we have, so I don't see a lot of point in pursuing them.

The fact is, since I am a Jew, the figure of Jesus just doesn't hold a lot of interest for me. He wasn't our Messiah, his teachings (those few that did not conform to the Jewish traditions and teachings of his own day) have no authority for us, and he's just a non-subject, like Buddha or Muhammad. We don't spend much time or energy talking or thinking about Jesus, even though Christians often seem to think we do. He seems to have been a nice fella, for the most part. Beyond that, we don't have much to say about him.

[fwbbeliever]

First of all, thank you cnorman for the link, it was very helpful.

I don't think God cares much about what we BELIEVE. I think He cares about what we DO, and that's the Jewish attitude and has been for at least two thousand years.

"That which is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor: that is the whole Torah. The rest is commentary."
--Hillel, a Jewish teacher of the 1st century BCE

With regard to your statement here, do you realize that most of the New Testament writers establish the basis of "faith" on some Old Testament verses?

Genesis 15:6 And he (Abraham) believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness.

Habakkuk 2:4 Behold, his soul which is lifted up is not upright in him: but the just shall live by his faith.

[cnorman18]

First of all, thank you cnorman for the link, it was very helpful.

I don't think God cares much about what we BELIEVE. I think He cares about what we DO, and that's the Jewish attitude and has been for at least two thousand years.

"That which is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor: that is the whole Torah. The rest is commentary."
--Hillel, a Jewish teacher of the 1st century BCE

With regard to your statement here, do you realize that most of the New Testament writers establish the basis of "faith" on some Old Testament verses?

Genesis 15:6 And he (Abraham) believed in the LORD; and he counted it to him for righteousness.

Yes, that verse has been used in that way for quite a long time; we Jews do not see it in quite the same way. From the Jewish Study Bible: "In the Tanakh, faith does not mean believing in spite of the evidence It means trusting profoundly in another person, in this case the person God who has reiterated his promise." Note, too, that the trust was proven by Abraham's subsequent actions, not merely his assertions; in fact, Abraham makes no assertions at all in this passage.

Habakkuk 2:4 Behold, his soul which is lifted up is not upright in him: but the just shall live by his faith.

In the JPS version, that verse is translated,
"Lo, his spirit within him is puffed up, not upright,
But the righteous man is rewarded with life
For his fidelity."
Which fidelity is proven, again, by his actions, not by claimed beliefs or words.

Jesus himself made this clear enough in several places, notably the parable of the two sons; when told to go to the vineyard, one SAYS he will go, but does not; the other one defies his father and refuses, but later goes. "Which one has done the will of his father?"

Two more points: There's nothing wrong with faith or belief, but it is irrelevant unless one lives one's faith in a practical way in real life. "Faith without works is dead," as Jesus's brother James put it. And -- a rather more important point in this context -- Jews do not speak of "salvation" in the Christian sense. We leave whatever happens after death to God; that's His business, and no one on Earth has any right to make claims about it. Again, there's nothing wrong with believing in Heaven; many Jews do, though by no means all. But the focus of religion ought to be on THIS life and THIS world, on making it better for ALL people. Otherwise what's the point of living THIS life in THIS world? God could have just put us all in Heaven in the first place and avoided all the hassle.