Yuku free message boards

Netanel wrote:

---

There are certainly observant Jews who have or had positive views about Yeshu, who attribute Paul with creating the deity and religion surrounding Yeshu. There is no uniform view of Yeshu among all Jews, as there is regarding the religion of Christianity. Yeshu is not central or important to our beliefs one way or another.

+++Ben: As a matter of fact, there is no uniform view about Jesus among all Jews. I am of the opinion for example that Jesus did exist and never thought of himself the Messiah. According to Acts 11:26, the followers of Paul started being called Christians for the first time in Antioch because he Paul was preaching that Jesus was Christ, the Messiah. And that's about 30 years after Jesus' death.

Some Jews are content to think he never existed. Others think Yeshu did exist and the evidence poorly concealed in the GT shows him to be almost completely in line with the Pharisees and Rabbinic Judaism, and having some similar features with the Hasidim. Two books to pursue for this view are by Hyam Maccoby one called "Jesus the Pharisee" the other called "The Mythmaker" about Paul and the invention of the Christian religion.

+++Ben: Jesus was indeed an observant Jew within the line with the Pharisees and Rabbinic Judaism. According to Matthew 5:17-19, he is said to have come to confirm the Law and the Prophets to the letter, and warned all Jews to do the same. Therefore, all those woes attributed to him against the Pharisees are interpolations by the gospel writers because of the grudge Paul had against them for having never permitted him to build a church in Israeli soil.

Me personally, I think it is likely Yeshu existed, and that he, his followers, his brother, etc. were all Torah observant Jews in line with the Pharisees. They didn't consider Yeshu to be a god, and the concept would've been repulsive to them. Yeshu initially seems to view himself in the same vein as John the Baptiser viewed himself, which is Torah-observant Jewish outreach, trying to bring Jews to do t'shuvah. Perhaps he thought of himself as a prophet. Eventually he thinks he is the messiah (though which messiah, who knows).

+++Ben: I beg to disagree that Jesus ever thought himself to be the Messiah. The headquarters of the Nazarenes, his disciples was in Jerusalem, and they were coexisting peacefully with mainstream Judaism for almost 30 years until Paul showed up preaching that Jesus was the Messiah, son of God, and that he had resurrected. Within 15 days only the local Jews were on an uproar to kill him for preaching heresy in Jerusalem. That's a strong evidence that those things about Jesus were never in the agenda of his disciples.

None of these things (t'shuvah, prophecy, and messiah) were blasphemous and in fact were all near and dear to the hearts of the Pharisees. They were devoted to bringing Torah to every Jew regardless of wealth or any other consideration. Although prophecy was viewed as having ceased they believed in a time when it would return, and they obviously believed in the messianic age and messiah.

+++Ben: Yes, Messianic Age, but about the Messiah, per se, I adopt Isaiah's views that the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53, whom Isaiah identifies with Israel, is the Messiah. In fact, he does mention him by name in Isaiah 41:8,9; 44:1,2,21; 45:4.

The Pharisees would not have been hostile to any of these thing, and in fact they worked towards and desired them all. The treatment of Peter by Gamaliel - whose true position among the Pharisees is concealed in the account - is perfectly in line with how a messianic movement would have been received. Basically wait and see with guarded optimism. Peter is treated by Gamaliel not as an idolater or heretic, but as a law-abiding Jew. Gamaliel never would've made such comments about an idolatrous movement. None of the messianic hopefuls of the first centuries BCE and CE were Sadducees, who were a small group of wealthy Hellenists. They all came from movements which adhered to Rabbinic teaching. There is no reason to believe that the real Yeshu and his followers were any different.

+++Ben: As a matter of fact, Jesus and all his Apostles were Nazarenes, and the Nazarenes enjoyed good relationship with the Pharisees and all regular Jews in general. In fact, James, Jesus' brother was in charge of the headquarters of the Sect of the Nazarenes in Jerusalem in whose Commitee figured some of the Pharisees who had joined the the Sect. (Acts 15:5) Mind you, I didn't say "converted" but that they joined the Sect. The Nazarenes had become but one of the sects of Judaism at the time.

The problem is that these observant followers of Yeshu didn't last long, at least not in any significant role. Their movement was centered in Jerusalem, and after James was killed and Jerusalem was destroyed the Hellenists (Paul's followers) had free reign to perpetuate the new religion.

+++Ben: According to the book of Acts, Paul did not wait for James' death to spread his religion like wild fire. He would work on the Synagogues of the Nazarenes overturning entire Synagogues into Christian churches from Antioch all the way throughout Asia Minor.

In essence, it is my take that Yeshu and his followers thought he was the king messiah in opposition to Rome, and I think the gospels support this (although there is so much editing and re-working that the overall picture is concealed, although in a number of places very poorly). But this is just my take. It has no bearing on my observance of Torah one way or another. It's just my take on a fellow Jew. Yeshu of course was not the messiah. That doesn't inherently make him a heretic or idolater. But the religion that was and has been founded making him central is idolatry.

+++Ben: I appreciate your caution. At the beginning, some of the disciples did entertain the hope that Jesus could be used as a kind of Messiah against the Romans. But soon they realized that he was but intent on renewal of the spirit of Jewish observance. He was not the Messiah and never claimed to be one in the first place. Therefore, he was no heretic or idolater. The heretic and idolater was Paul with his Hellenistic Christology which has caused a lot of suffering to the Jewish People throughout History.

Ben

reuven65 wrote:

---

Why all this back and forth about a guy who probably didn't exist and even if he did, has nothing to do with Judaism?

Reuven65, what are you talking about? We have been losing Jews almost everyday to Christianity. Thousands of them have already adopted the things of Christianity, while Jews like you get annoyed that others are fighting against what Christianity is doing to us. We need more Jews to preserve Judaism, and that cannot be done with prayers only. Wake up man, and smell the coffee!

Whether Jesus existed or not, things are happening, and we must fight as if he did exist. That's exactly what Christians want you to think and relax the guard. And if he existed, I assure you from my researches on the "New Testament" that he was an observant Jew just like you and me. If I was not sure you are afraid to open the "New Testament" I would ask you to read what is recorded in Matthew 5:17-19. That Jesus came to confirm Judaism to the letter. The heretic who had nothing to do with Judaism was Paul, who fabricated his Christology 30 years afater Jesus' death.

Do you know something? You might find rather odd that I should suggest that we should claim Jesus as one of our own so that Christians be left with Paul only, who by the way, was the real Messiah of Christianity. He knew the history of previous self-proclaimed Messiahs who failed exactly for that reason: For having self-proclaimed themselves the Messiah. Paul, on the contrary, being much more intelligent than the others, proclaimed himself the Messiah by proxy. In the name of a dead Jew who had died 30 years before. We should change our strategy
in order to save our Jews who are crowding the churches.

Ben

tyolilums wrote:

---

Is it acceptable for observant Jews to have any positive views or ideas about Jesus? (I'm not particularly interested in hearing from those who don't believe he existed.)

I'm also curious to know if any of you attempt to separate the Jew, Jesus, from the religion Christianity. Is that possible? Is the real problem Jesus...or Christianity...in your view?

Shalom Tyolilums,

It's perfectly acceptable for an observant Jew to have positive views or ideas about Jesus. He was after all an observant Jew himself with a lot of love for all the mitzvot, and confirmed everything down to the letter, mind you. (Mat. 5:17-19) Jesus never had anything to do with Christianity, which started with Paul in Antioch about 30 years after Jesus' death, according to Acts 11:26. So, the real problem is not Jesus but Paul. No one is to blame for the claims of another. However, that Jesus was an observant Jew, even a Rabbi is as far as I can go. Anything beyond this is Pauline and must be rejected.

Ben