Do Jewish Orthodox Scholars Shy Away From Messianic Scripture Nowadays?

Status
Not open for further replies.

0isez

Puritan Board Freshman
As I was studying John, I noticed John 1:45 where Phillip finds Nathanael and says to him that they found the Messiah, the one that Moses and the prophets wrote about. I know there was a lot of talk about the coming Messiah in Israel at that time due to Roman occupation where even Jewish laymen were familiar with the prophecies concerning the Messiah. But since then, after Jesus, has Christ's coming cooled the Jewish fervor for a Messiah's appearance in the future? Or is it still a major theme in orthodox synagogues?
 
That's a brilliant question. I've nothing to give by way of answer. I've always wondered about that. And, also, how come modern Jews, as far as I know don't sacrifice anymore?
 
Yes but it is a theological/salvific denial of their very essence surely - it must be the victory of the national Israel over the true Israel of faith - or the unbeleiving works dependent Judaism over the faith of the true people of God a la Abraham.
I don't disagree, although the Orthodox, and especially the Ultra-Orthodox, believe in an eventual Third Temple, akin to Dispensationalism.
 
Ok, I'll jump in. Please note - there are very few reform and conservative Jews (those terms don't mean what you think they mean!) in Israel. I don't know what they think.

The concept of "Mashiach" (Hebrew: משיח) does exist. However, the conception they have of him is of some sort of super-important man. I don't know what the fine print of the theological views in the yeshiva are like, but the general idea is much like it was at Jesus' time - this guy comes, all the Jews accept him immediately, he takes over the world, builds the temple ext. Among some, especially the less religious, it is used as a joke - by the time this or that will happen the Mashiach will come. This is of course because they thought he would come any moment now already at Jesus' time and from their'e point of view they are still waiting.
There is one group of ultra Orthodox who are extra active, especially in making converts from "nominal Judaism", called chabad, who believe the messiah is one dead guy from lubavitch by the name of Navhman Mendel Schneerson, or simply the rabbi from Lubavitch. They tend to play Jewish religious songs publicaly, from vans, including one song that goes "Mashiach, Mashiach, Mashiach, oy oy oy oy oy oy". It is one of the most famous "Jewish songs" over here. They have flags and signs that read "יחי המלך המשיח" (hail the king the Mashiach), with his picture. My opinion is that it is blasphemy of course, I once even met a religious Jew who thought they were idolatrous.
Then you have the religious Zionists. Some of these are relatively normal people, and they are very well accomplished, but any time you read about Jewish settlers doing something stupid - that's them. They do have a conception of Mashiach, but they tend to push for actual change today. Take Theonomists, give them a yarmulke, and crank up the crazy by 500, and you get them. They are the ones pushing the hardest for executing terrorists, settling in the west bank, being less merciful in war ext..., And some of them even push for a rebuilt temple.
You also have some ultra- orthodox groups who believe the state of Israel is evil, and the true state of Israel will be established by Mashiach. They have a noticble population in Israel, but their'e position is stronger in places like Brooklyn since the only reason such people came in the first place is that they had to in times of ethnic persecution.
I am not sure where in their'e eschatology the rabbis put a resurrection, an afterlife, a hell, and a heaven all Jews get to, but those concepts do exist.
 
https://tentsofshem.wordpress.com/2020/02/14/answering-jewish-objections-to-Jesus-vol-2/
https://tentsofshem.wordpress.com/2020/02/03/answering-jewish-objections-to-Jesus-volume-1/
 
has Christ's coming cooled the Jewish fervor for a Messiah's appearance in the future
Yes and no. This caused them to reinterpret many messianic prophecies and make up new interpretations. The synagogue liturgical lectionary (not that they call it that) literally skip Issiah 53. As my previous reply indicates they have a conception of messiah. Many false ones appeared in history: bar kochba, supported by rabbi akiva, are one example. Somehow they are both highly honoured despite that lie. Another was shabtai Zevi, but he went really crazy.
 
The concept of "Mashiach" (Hebrew: משיח) does exist. However, the conception they have of him is of some sort of super-important man. I don't know what the fine print of the theological views in the yeshiva are like, but the general idea is much like it was at Jesus' time - this guy comes, all the Jews accept him immediately, he takes over the world, builds the temple ext. Among some, especially the less religious, it is used as a joke - by the time this or that will happen the Mashiach will come. This is of course because they thought he would come any moment now already at Jesus' time and from their'e point of view they are still waiting.
There is one group of ultra Orthodox who are extra active, especially in making converts from "nominal Judaism", called chabad, who believe the messiah is one dead guy from lubavitch by the name of Navhman Mendel Schneerson, or simply the rabbi from Lubavitch. They tend to play Jewish religious songs publicaly, from vans, including one song that goes "Mashiach, Mashiach, Mashiach, oy oy oy oy oy oy". It is one of the most famous "Jewish songs" over here. They have flags and signs that read "יחי המלך המשיח" (hail the king the Mashiach), with his picture. My opinion is that it is blasphemy of course, I once even met a religious Jew who thought they were idolatrous.
Then you have the religious Zionists. Some of these are relatively normal people, and they are very well accomplished, but any time you read about Jewish settlers doing something stupid - that's them. They do have a conception of Mashiach, but they tend to push for actual change today. Take Theonomists, give them a yarmulke, and crank up the crazy by 500, and you get them. They are the ones pushing the hardest for executing terrorists, settling in the west bank, being less merciful in war ext..., And some of them even push for a rebuilt temple.
You also have some ultra- orthodox groups who believe the state of Israel is evil, and the true state of Israel will be established by Mashiach. They have a noticble population in Israel, but their'e position is stronger in places like Brooklyn since the only reason such people came in the first place is that they had to in times of ethnic persecution.
I am not sure where in their'e eschatology the rabbis put a resurrection, an afterlife, a hell, and a heaven all Jews get to, but those concepts do exist.

Sounds about as varied and convoluted as the theological views (not necessarily messianic) that currently exist within modern Christianity...
 
Sounds about as varied and convoluted as the theological views (not necessarily messianic) that currently exist within modern Christianity...
Yep. I could go on about other disagreements. Then you have nominal Jews and seculars, with a very blurry line between them. You got a whole spectrum there too - from almost religious to woke. Those groups end up being the majority. And then we have 20% of citizens who are Arabs, and a whole lot more in east Jerusalem, plus Palestinian citizens with a work permit.
And by the way, most of these religious controversies end up being tied in to politics.
 
Yes and no. This caused them to reinterpret many messianic prophecies and make up new interpretations. The synagogue liturgical lectionary (not that they call it that) literally skip Issiah 53. As my previous reply indicates they have a conception of messiah. Many false ones appeared in history: bar kochba, supported by rabbi akiva, are one example. Somehow they are both highly honoured despite that lie. Another was shabtai Zevi, but he went really crazy.
I would think that the normal response of the Jewish scholars would be simply to say; "no,Jesus was not the one. We are waiting for a greater, one who will make manifest that Israel is the chosen people of all the world" And then come up with a few scriptures or something from the Talmud spun their way, backing up their false claim. But what you all described to me was absolute, stark raving madness! I had to digest the responses for a couple hours and I still don't no what to say.
 
I would think that the normal response of the Jewish scholars would be simply to say; "no,Jesus was not the one. We are waiting for a greater, one who will make manifest that Israel is the chosen people of all the world" And then come up with a few scriptures or something from the Talmud spun their way, backing up their false claim. But what you all described to me was absolute, stark raving madness! I had to digest the responses for a couple hours and I still don't no what to say.
That's more or less correct, yes. They would bring up stuff Jesus supposedly should have done and argue with Christian interpretations of biblical prophecy, even (and especially) the plainest ones. They will probably quote a bunch of rabbies you never heard of too. Among less educated Jews you would get something similar, or possibly just a lot of drama. Take into account that religious Jews, and some secular Jews, are brainwashed to hate Jesus and reject him. This is partly for religious reasons, and then the fact they tend to lump all westerners together doesn't help. They might very well view you as a tri-theist Nazi crusader who prays to pictures of Mary.
Of course these are all generalizations, and this of course is no racist attack on the Jews. I myself am Jewish by blood.

As an aside, I really wish reformed missions would care more about missions to the Jews, and to Israel in particular. The Macedonian who asked Paul to come help him has moved to Jerusalem long ago.
 
Michael L. Brown has written a world-class series in his Answering Jewish Objections books, though apart from that he is far from sound.

I grew up in a Reformed Jewish family (except for my mother, grandmother, and grandfather who professed faith in Christ), which watered-down Judaism has been a bane to my family – culturally Jewish but no need to believe in God, Moses, the Bible, etc. I never heard the gospel in my youth as my mother, besides being ill and me away at school, was not much for sharing her faith. I didn't even know what being Jewish signified until I came to Christ and started to read my Bible.

Later I wrote A Poet Arises In Israel to speak to my people after the flesh.
 

Attachments

  • A Poet Arises In Israel 2.pdf
    524.5 KB · Views: 0
There is a great Jewish apologist on YouTube, by the name of Tovia Singer, who also has his own channel there. So if you want to know anything specific, just search for his name on YouTube, and then the topic you want to know about.

Moreover, as already hinted, Michael Brown (who is a jewish charismatic) wrote a book series dealing with that. He also has a debate with Tovia Singer on YouTube, but I think that’s a bit older already. But nonetheless very informative. You can look him up on YouTube for specific questions as well. He is a friend of James White.

But I think the best place to go is the Volume One introductory book on the exposition of the book of Hebrews from John Owen, where he deals specifically with the objections and position of the Jews. I think anyone who is dealing with Jews should read that. It’s free here: https://www.monergism.com/exposition-epistle-hebrews-ebook

As an aside, I really wish reformed missions would care more about missions to the Jews, and to Israel in particular.

The puritans were very strong on this, the Jews and eschatology were immediately connected. Also, they have very good points, for example with the quotations and applications of the Old Testament in Matthew. Just engaging with Jews on this most important topic forces you to understand what is really going on in the apostles minds, and how they understood the Scriptures. It’s really refreshing and enlightening, and I think the fact that the Jews are the very root of the church (in Paul’s sense of the word) should encourage us to study them, and to engage with them.
 
The puritans were very strong on this.
I was specifically speaking of the reformed today. The puritans were very strong on pretty much everything
Also, the Jews have very good points, for example with the quotations and applications of the Old Testament in Matthew. Just engaging with Jews on this most important topic forces you to understand what is really going on in the apostles minds, and how they understood the Scriptures. It’s really refreshing and enlightening, and I think the fact that the Jews are the very root of the church (in Paul’s sense of the word) should encourage us to study them, and to engage with them.
We do need to make sure we do not blur lines. Today's religious Jews are spiritually descended from the worst of pharisees. So if you mean engaging with Jewish Christians, or having a better background for the new testament by being engaged in the same old debate, that can be useful, but engaging with orthodox Jews should be done as part of the great commission and not as some joint theological effort.
 
but engaging with orthodox Jews should be done as part of the great commission and not as some joint theological effort.

These two are not mutually exclusive nor inconsistent. Jesus and the apostles themselves differentiate between Jew and Gentile when speaking eschatologically, the “times of the Gentiles” and until the “fullness of the Gentiles” have come in. I mean in Roman’s alone Paul gives them these great privileges, and calling them still the elect of God, for their fathers sake. Romans 9:4 and 11:28.
 
I was specifically speaking of the reformed today. The puritans were very strong on pretty much everything

Yes, but for the puritans the Jews had this theological and eschatological weight. They didn’t just care about the Jews because they were lost as anyone else was, but additionally because of their stance and promises which still were awaiting fulfillment. This doesn’t make them in any sense “better” than anyone else, but God has placed them in this context, and when it is true that Jews still await promises (as the puritans thought), then they do have an important place still, because God has to fulfill these promises.
 
These two are not mutually exclusive nor inconsistent. Jesus and the apostles themselves differentiate between Jew and Gentile when speaking eschatologically, the “times of the Gentiles” and until the “fullness of the Gentiles” have come in. I mean in Roman’s alone Paul gives them these great privileges, and calling them still the elect of God, for their fathers sake. Romans 9:4 and 11:28.
I do believe in a future national conversion of the Jews, but this does not mean we should cooperate theologically. Jesus debated them. Paul debated those who introduced ideas from them. In the apocalypse they are called "them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan".
Should we cooperate with the pope? What about Islam? If anti-trinitarian Jews are okay, why not muslims? Or Mormons? Perhaps even Hindus while we're at it? Theists of the world, unite?

Besides, I might be missing something, but you're reply rings a lot like the dispensationalism I grew up with, which is a view that is in conflict with reformed doctrine.
 
Yes, but for the puritans the Jews had this theological and eschatological weight. They didn’t just care about the Jews because they were lost as anyone else was, but additionally because of their stance and promises which still were awaiting fulfillment. This doesn’t make them in any sense “better” than anyone else, but God has placed them in this context, and when it is true that Jews still await promises (as the puritans thought), then they do have an important place still, because God has to fulfill these promises.
Show me one puritan who would disagree with my statement:
engaging with orthodox Jews should be done as part of the great commission and not as some joint theological effort.
 
I do believe in a future national conversion of the Jews, but this does not mean we should cooperate theologically.

Cooperate? I didn’t mean that, sorry if that came through! By “engaging with them” I simply meant arguing, debating, evangelizing them. Showing more love to them in this respect.

Should we cooperate with the pope? What about Islam? If anti-trinitarian Jews are okay, why not muslims? Or Mormons? Perhaps even Hindus while we're at it? Theists of the world, unite?

Of course not, never.

Besides, I might be missing something, but you're reply rings a lot like the dispensationalism I grew up with, which is a view that is in conflict with reformed doctrine.

I am hostile to it (as a theological concept), no worry.

Show me one puritan who would disagree with my statement:

I think the misunderstanding is solved now.
 
but engaging with orthodox Jews should be done as part of the great commission and not as some joint theological effort.

Because of the misunderstanding I here understood you to say something like: Just evangelize the Jews because they are lost people like anyone else (great commission), and do not consider them in any other way (as some joint theological effort in the sense that they are still beloved and elect for their fathers sake or eschatologically important, for example).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top