Why don’t Jews Believe Jesus was a Messiah?? Dr. Brown vs. Rabbi Frietag

originally posted by: Deetermined
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Why do you keep going on about Paul? Everything I've posted has come from the books of John, which didn't teach anything differently than what Paul did. It's clear that you haven't read or compared the scriptures.

And while you want to complain about the accuracy of the New Testament, maybe it would help to know and understand how much of the Old Testament is repeated, explained and included in the new...

www.biblecharts.org...

Because Paul, after winning the war for Christianity would have been in a position to decide church doctrine.

He would have had the ability to rewrite the books in circulation to his own political bend..

Remember it wasn’t the decouples who first wrote it down.. it was the deciples deciples..

Aka Paul’s generation.

According to Jewish tradition Paul added all the “faith >works” ideology that was the antithesis of Judaism.

There is a VERY good argument that it should be called Paulianity ..

Because the shift with his additions is drastic..


PS.. it doesn’t matter how much of the OT is in the new..

It matters how much of the New Testament is in the old.

How much warming did god give the Jews concerning jesus???

Was/is Judaism literally the opposite of Christianity??

a reply to: Deetermined

According to the super edited NT.. that has an obvious reason to pretend that is the case...

What does the OT say???


Does the OT continuously warn not to trust anyone closing get to be a god??

Does the OT specifically not to trust anyone claiming to be a messiah who doesn’t do XY and Z???

Does the OT specifically reject the concept of a new covenant without FIRST all the world inherently having the knowledge of god and the law in their hearts??



You can’t quote the NT nor the Christian OT as your proof the Bible is true..

I could do the same thing with the Book of Mormon..

If you quote the Jewish version of the OT I will discuss it with you.

'FOR THEY ARE A REBELLIOUS HOUSE is the reason that seems to be reiterated throught the Bible at least the books I've read.

The depictions of a surreal, neverending Wickedness including house eating one's own babies and rejecting one's own father/lord was quiet superfluous and left a lasting impression to relate to the STATE of the world TODAY, in retrospect!

originally posted by: Deetermined
a reply to: Akragon

The man said his Father is One... and he wasn't his own Father...

No, Jesus said HE AND HIS FATHER were ONE.

John 10:30 - I and my Father are one.

That's what Jesus taught, so don't tell us what he did or did not teach, as you've never understood any of it.

thats correct...

but again you lack understanding of what he actually meant

When two people are married they become ONE... but do they suddenly become one and the same person?

Of course not... Jesus meant one essence, ONE purpose...

not one and the same...

a reply to: Seede

So i take it you are not a Trinitarian?

My apologies if that is the case...

Or perhaps you are one that believes a different kind of trinity... but the very word means equality between all of the three

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Oh, brother! Maybe you should do some research on the canonization of the Bible and who, what, how, and how long it took them to determine what was included or not. Hint: there had to be other scriptures in other books to back up the beliefs and statements in each one. You're really grasping at straws if you think that one heretical influence deems the entire New Testament negatively influenced or irrelevant. You've got nothing.

a reply to: Akragon

When two people are married they become ONE... but do they suddenly become one and the same person?

Of course not... Jesus meant one essence, ONE purpose...

Except, that's not what Jesus meant when he was stating that He was the Alpha and Omega in the book of Revelation.

Revelation 1:5-8

5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,

6 And hath made us kings and priests unto God and his Father; to him be glory and dominion for ever and ever. Amen.

7 Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen.

8 I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the ending, saith the Lord, which is, and which was, and which is to come, the Almighty.

Revelation 22:12-13

12 And, behold, I come quickly; and my reward is with me, to give every man according as his work shall be.

13 I am Alpha and Omega , the beginning and the end, the first and the last.

Remember, it's JESUS who is returning and will be judging all of mankind. He is the Alpha and Omega and the Almighty.

Isaiah 9:6 - For unto us a child is born , unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

edit on 31-12-2017 by Deetermined because: (no reason given)

a reply to: andy06shake

They have no belief that god would come to earth.. that is toatally a Christian tradition.

Their messiah isn’t even divine at all.. he is just a regular old mortal king.


They believe they will know the predicted messiah by all the world INSTINCTIVELY KNOWING/FOLLOWING the Hebrew god and his laws.

So they actually have a very specific checklist and no one divine at all.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Because Paul, after winning the war for Christianity would have been in a position to decide church doctrine. He would have had the ability to rewrite the books in circulation to his own political bend.. Remember it wasn’t the decouples who first wrote it down.. it was the deciples deciples.. Aka Paul’s generation. According to Jewish tradition Paul added all the “faith >works” ideology that was the antithesis of Judaism. There is a VERY good argument that it should be called Paulianity .. Because the shift with his additions is drastic.. PS.. it doesn’t matter how much of the OT is in the new.. It matters how much of the New Testament is in the old. How much warming did god give the Jews concerning jesus??? Was/is Judaism literally the opposite of Christianity??

No, Paul had no authority in either the Nazarene Synagogue of James or the church of Rome regardless of what his critics say. The three pillars of the future Christians were James, John and Peter. Paul had nothing to do with the organization of church. Now what others did in organization of the Roman church is another matter of which Paul had no part. Paul was a companion of Peter who in turn baptized Clement of Rome as the third Bishop of the Roman church. So that should show all the critics of Paul as not being truthful. If Paul held an office of any power then it might be said that he did have influence in church doctrine but he had nothing of the sort.

In fact Paul was nothing but an evangelist sent out by Jesus and did not even belong to the congregation of James. The power structure of the synagogue of James was as follows. James was the president or High Priest [Nasi]. The Apostle John was the Sagan or Deputy High Priest. The Apostle Peter was the Ah Beth-Din or Chief Officer of the religious court. Then there were the elected seventy representatives of the congregation with a cabinet of fifteen who were called the elders. Paul held no position and in fact started his evangelizing about five years after the synagogue of James was formed.

The letters of Paul were written some years after the Nazarene synagogue and were not known in the circles of the established congregations of James. Hellenist were not allowed to bring their Greek or Greek influence into the first Jesus movement. The entire liturgy was Hebrew and Aramaic. All of the teaching was done by the seventy elected and Apostles of Jesus. The Hellenist' were allowed to have their own synagogues with Greek organizations but were still under the authority of James as the High Priest. Paul had no part in any of this authority and had no influence in any portions of the church. The epistles of Paul were in fact adopted by the Roman Christian organizations and not of Paul whatsoever.

The national Judaism of which the Sadducee's controlled in Jesus' day was in direct opposition of the synagogue of James in almost all respects. The four national Judaic movements of today are also in direct opposition to the Nazarene Jesus movement. Today we have four denominations of Judaism which they call movements.

a reply to: Deetermined

HE didn't say he was "the alpha and omega"

John of patmos did...

And speaking of the canon of the bible... Revelation was the last to be include because of that statement... It reinforced the trinity... A few hundred years after it was written and the trinity was solidified by the councils of the church

Before which is was not recognized as a legit book...

Wonder why?

a reply to: Seede

A) I know he didn’t.. because the Jewish followers of jesus rejected Paul and his claim of “visions”... as well as his assertion that Christians were no longer bound by Hebrew law..


Paul represented his own faction with vastly different dogma that was far more palletable to the Romans..

Which led to far more recruitment, which led to his faction gaining dominance..

James and others wanted everyone to remain Jews..

a reply to: Seede

Paul authored 13 of the 27 books..



That is basically half..


A guy who never even met Jesus authored half the New Testament...


Yea.. he was definitely a bit player..

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: Deetermined

HE didn't say he was "the alpha and omega"

John of patmos did...

And speaking of the canon of the bible... Revelation was the last to be include because of that statement... It reinforced the trinity... A few hundred years after it was written and the trinity was solidified by the councils of the church

Before which is was not recognized as a legit book...

Wonder why?

You're a hoot! You'll argue about what Jesus did or did not say and then argue that the books you don't agree with were written by someone other than Jesus! Technically, it was all written by someone other than Jesus, so how can anyone take anything you say seriously? You have no credibility on any Christian topic.

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: Seede

Paul authored 13 of the 27 books..



That is basically half..


A guy who never even met Jesus authored half the New Testament...


Yea.. he was definitely a bit player..

Paul had an encounter with the Holy Spirit, but to sum up your thread in a couple of easy sentences...

The Jews don't accept Jesus as their Messiah for the same reason you and Akragon don't, you weren't meant to.

2 Thessalonians 2:10-14

10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.

11 And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:

12 That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

13 But we are bound to give thanks alway to God for you, brethren beloved of the Lord, because God hath from the beginning chosen you to salvation through sanctification of the Spirit and belief of the truth:

14 Whereunto he called you by our gospel, to the obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.

originally posted by: Deetermined

originally posted by: Akragon
a reply to: Deetermined

HE didn't say he was "the alpha and omega"

John of patmos did...

And speaking of the canon of the bible... Revelation was the last to be include because of that statement... It reinforced the trinity... A few hundred years after it was written and the trinity was solidified by the councils of the church

Before which is was not recognized as a legit book...

Wonder why?

You're a hoot! You'll argue about what Jesus did or did not say and then argue that the books you don't agree with were written by someone other than Jesus! Technically, it was all written by someone other than Jesus, so how can anyone take anything you say seriously? You have no credibility on any Christian topic.

glad i amuse you...

Ya of course they were written by someone other then Jesus... revelation is clearly not anything from Jesus, it sounds nothing like he spoke in any of the gospels... yet all the gospels sound the same...

its pretty obvious... not to mention the fact that it wasn't canon until the trinity was established... and the only book that has "Jesus" claiming to be God... obviously it was included to add weight to the trinitarian dogma...

considering it was written close to the first century, then only added after the fact...

And i don't care about your opinions of my credibility... but im sure you knew that

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Jesus is a fictional character like Mickey Mouse.

a reply to: Deetermined

Are you therefore saying that Jews are unrighteous and beyond any kind of help? Because if you are that's a load of anti-Semitic bullcrap.

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Don't shoot the messenger. I'm just quoting the Bible.

Zechariah 13:7-9

7 Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, and against the man that is my fellow, saith the Lord of hosts: smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered: and I will turn mine hand upon the little ones.

8 And it shall come to pass, that in all the land, saith the Lord, two parts therein shall be cut off and die; but the third shall be left therein.

9 And I will bring the third part through the fire, and will refine them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold is tried: they shall call on my name, and I will hear them: I will say, It is my people: and they shall say, The Lord is my God.

originally posted by: Deetermined
a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Don't shoot the messenger. I'm just quoting the Bible.

Zechariah 13:7-9

7 Awake, O sword, against my shepherd, and against the man that is my fellow, saith the Lord of hosts: smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered: and I will turn mine hand upon the little ones.

8 And it shall come to pass, that in all the land, saith the Lord, two parts therein shall be cut off and die; but the third shall be left therein.

9 And I will bring the third part through the fire, and will refine them as silver is refined, and will try them as gold is tried: they shall call on my name, and I will hear them: I will say, It is my people: and they shall say, The Lord is my God.

I see. So - you think that non-Christians are inferior, based on your reading of the bible. Fascinating. Deluded, but fascinating.

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

I see. So - you think that non-Christians are inferior, based on your reading of the bible. Fascinating. Deluded, but fascinating.

It doesn't matter what I think. It only matters what the Creator thinks. I won't be the one judging them, He will.