|
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Dancing
Posts: 9,940
|
This is a post I compiled from a few different sources:
( http://www.shamash.org/lists/scj-faq...faq/17-03.html, http://www.aish.com/jewishissues/jew...e_In_Jesus.asp)
Quote:
According to the Torah, the Messiah will:
1. Ezekiel 37:26-28: Build the Third Temple (besides saying that the Messiah will build the Third Temple, this chapter also details the exact dimensions that the Third Temple would have - precluding the Third Temple from simply being an allegory in Christian tradition)
2. Isaiah 43:5-6: Gather all Jews back to the Land of Israel
3. Isaiah 2:4: Usher in an era of world peace, and end all hatred, oppression, suffering and disease. "Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall man learn war anymore."
4. Zechariah 14:9: Spread universal knowledge of the G-d of Israel - uniting the entire human race as one: "G-d will be King over all the world—on that day, G-d will be One and His Name will be One"
[...]
Jesus was not descended from King David. Per Genesis 49:10 and Isaiah 11:1, the Messiah must be descended on his father's side from King David. However, 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! The Christian idea of a virgin birth is derived from a verse in Isaiah 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 G-ds.
|
Isaiah 7:14 in Hebrew reads "this young woman" while Isaiah 7:14 in the LXX reads "this virgin". In either case, Isaiah 7 is not a messainic prophecy, it's a chapter that deals with King Ahaz and his fear of the neighboring kingdoms. Isaiah wanted King Ahaz to wait for God to give him support instead of making alliances with Assyria. See the history of King Ahaz in the Jewish Encyclopedia.
Quote:
In response, it is claimed that Joseph adopted Jesus, and passed on his genealogy via adoption. There are two problems with this claim:
1. 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;
2. Joseph could never pass on by adoption that which he doesn't have. Because Joseph descended from Jeconiah (Mat. 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:
1. There is no evidence that Mary descends from David. The third chapter of Luke traces Joseph's genealogy, not Mary's.
2. 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. Num. 1:18; Ezra 2:59.
3. 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 Sam. 7:14)
4. 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
|
Quote-mined "prophecies" invented by Christians:
Quote:
There were also mistakes with respect to Jesus's death and its foretelling. Psalms 22:17 says, "Like a lion, they are at my hands and feet." The Hebrew word ki-ari (like a lion) is grammatically similar to the word "gouged." Thus Christianity reads the verse as a reference to crucifixion: "They pierced my hands and feet." Other scholars have said that Psalms 22:17 has the Hebrew word ki-asi, which would make this verse say "They bound my hands and feet". As for the events that led up to the crucifixion:
1. First, the NT says that the trial was on a Friday, and that on the night before, Jesus celebrated the Passover meal with his disciples. Accordingly, that would mean that his trial was on the first day of Passover. Here is a violation of two legal principles -- his trial was not on a Thursday or Monday as required, and it was on a holiday when no trials whatsoever could be held.
2. Second, there were no witnesses of a warning to Jesus and no witnesses of his actual crime. The NT account of his trial shows that he was convicted on his own testimony. This is a severe violation of the Torah.
3. Third, there is no account in the NT of any call for defense witnesses. Both the second and third points violate Jewish Sahnedrin law in Deut 19:15.
4. Fourth, the choice of execution methods violates Torah completely. If convicted for Sabbath violation or false prophecy, the appropriate punishment was stoning. Why use a Roman torture method that took days to kill the felon, if it did at all, and resulted in a mutilated corpse?
5. Fifth, if the trial and execution were indeed held on Friday, there are several problems, including limited time for a trial, and limited time for the execution. A crucifixion on a Friday afternoon was certain to run over through Shabbat and then later. Assuming that the 120 judges of the Sanhedrin would have permitted a crucifixion (which is unlikely), one would doubt that they would have risked having Jesus die on the cross after the Sabbath began Friday night (the Sabbath being on Saturday). Because of the Sabbath laws, they would have been unable to carry the corpse to a burial site, and leaving the corpse on the cross overnight would be a Torah violation.
6. Finally, sixth, there is no record teaching that the court of that era was known to be reckless with the use of the death penalty. Yet, not only was Jesus crucified, but so were two petty criminals, according to the NT, and their crimes did not even justify the death penalty under Jewish law.
[...]
In Matthew 22:41-44, there is a reported conversation between Jesus and the Pharisees concerning the genealogy of the Messiah. The Pharisees said that the Messiah will be the son of David, and Jesus reportedly counted: "'How then does David in the spirit call him 'Lord,' saying: 'The Lord said to my Lord, "Sit at My right hand, till I make your enemies your footstool"? If David then called him Lord, how is he his son?' And no one was able to answer him a word, neither did any man from that day forth ask him any more questions." This conversation could not have happened! Matthew is referring to Psalm 110:1, and is based on a clear mistranslation.
The first "Lord" in the sentence is properly capitalized because it uses the four-letter Hebrew name for G-d, the Yud kay vav kay. We would pronounce that in prayer as "Adonai," which means Lord and only applies to G-d. The second "Lord" is improperly capitalized because the Hebrew word used at that point is "adoni" which means "my lord" and only refers to a human. So Psalms 110:1 should read: "The Lord said unto my lord, sit at my right hand, until I make your enemies your footstool." So who is the second and lower-cased "lord"? King David. This psalm begins "LeDavid Mizmor" (A song to David as opposed to by David). Accordingly, the song is written for David and makes him the subject of the first sentence. With that knowledge, the rest of the psalm makes perfect sense, G-d is giving much needed comfort to the King of Israel. Alternatively, it can be understood as a psalm written by David to be sung by the Levite choir praising him after his death.
Certainly any Pharisee would have known the meaning of Psalm 110 and would not have been confused by "Adonai" versus "adoni". It is not so clear that a Greek-educated story teller with little or no Jewish training, and a Christian axe to grind, would have been so knowledgeable. The story in Matthew then must be made up and judged self-serving.
Yet despite the obvious mistranslation, Psalms 110:1, continues to be misused by missionaries to prove that the Messiah sits at G-d's right hand and is like G-d. Judaism, however, believes that the Messiah is a human being, not a god.
[...]
Christians also claim that Isaiah 53 refers to Jesus. Actually, Isaiah 53 directly follows the theme of chapter 52, describing the exile and redemption of the Jewish people. The singular form is used because the Jews ("Israel") are regarded as one unit. 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.
|
|
10-25-2008, 09:50 AM
