Is there an official Jewish position on Jesus?

Do they believe there was a man named Jesus who wasn't the son of God or do they just reject the whole Jesus idea?

WriterDom said:

Do they believe there was a man named Jesus who wasn't the son of God or do they just reject the whole Jesus idea?

Click to expand...

From what I understand they believe in Jesus, but they think he was just a delusional man and/or a con artist.

Honestly, you can't deny that Jesus existed. Well, you can, but you'll just show you don't know anything about history. Who he was/wasn't is what's debatable.

rosco rathbone said:

http://www.jews-for-jesus.org/

Click to expand...

Oh god. Those guys.

I wouldn't necessarily call their position on Jesus an "official" one.

rosco rathbone said:

http://www.jews-for-jesus.org/

Click to expand...

K loves Michael Medved. He annoys me a lot less than Michael Savage.

The last time there was an official Jewish position on anything was during the Babylonian Captivity.

................

sadangel said:

My understanding from knowing several Jewish people is that those who are not of the Reformed Jews, but rather are considered Orthodox Jews, believe that Jesus was a man, but was not the Messiah. Orthodox Jews are waiting for the Messiah. Reformed Jews tend to believe that Jesus was the Messiah and are what some would call "Christian Jews" if that helps at all.

Click to expand...

WTF???????
SINCE WHEN????

The Only "OFFICIAL" position is where Moses was when the lights went out!!

sadangel said:

My understanding from knowing several Jewish people is that those who are not of the Reformed Jews, but rather are considered Orthodox Jews, believe that Jesus was a man, but was not the Messiah. Orthodox Jews are waiting for the Messiah. Reformed Jews tend to believe that Jesus was the Messiah and are what some would call "Christian Jews" if that helps at all.

Click to expand...

I think all of my reform Jewish family would be pretty insulted to be called "Christian Jews." The only group for whom that term applies (IMO) is Jews For Jesus, which is, basically, a group of converted Jews who's main goal is to convert other Jews.

rosco rathbone said:

http://www.jews-for-jesus.org/

Click to expand...

rosco rathbone said:

The last time there was an official Jewish position on anything was during the Babylonian Captivity.

Click to expand...

*snicker* ok, I forgive you for the JFJ reference.

Uh, yeah, have never heard anyone called "Christian Jews" While I ID as reconstructionist, if anything, I would be really bothered by being called a Christian Jew.

Rabbi Shmuley Boteach writes "The real Jesus was a deeply religious Jewish patriot who despised the Romans for their cruelty to his people and for their paganism. He never once abrogated the laws of the Torah, and expressly condemned those who advocated doing so (Matthew 5:18). Jesus walked the earth with a yarmulke and a beard rather than a halo and a cross."

Click to expand...

Someone made a nice condensed page to give some opinions on your question here

The Torah can't be replaced because, suprise, because God told me everything and said he'd never say anything again so I am totally special and everyone else are collectively deluded.

In the Book of Deuteronomy G-d tells us that He has given us the complete Torah and that, "Lo bashamayim hee" (It shall not come from Heaven), there would be no further revelations related to the Law or amendments to the Contract. Deut. 30:12. See also Deut. 4:2 ("Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish from it, that ye may keep the commandments of the Lord your G-d which I command you.")

Click to expand...

-Note, the man writing this wasnt comfortable putting 'o' in G-d, but this is just copy-pasted.

00Syd said:

I think all of my reform Jewish family would be pretty insulted to be called "Christian Jews." The only group for whom that term applies (IMO) is Jews For Jesus, which is, basically, a group of converted Jews who's main goal is to convert other Jews.

Click to expand...

Syd. No offense was intended. I said it as I thought I remembered it. I apolgize profusely for both getting it wrong and for offending. I was also saying it the way that at least three of my friends who are reformed Jews have said it to me...but I didn't mean to offend.

sadangel said:

Syd. No offense was intended. I said it as I thought I remembered it. I apolgize profusely for both getting it wrong and for offending. I was also saying it the way that at least three of my friends who are reformed Jews have said it to me...but I didn't mean to offend.

Click to expand...

Interesting. Well, this was more common in the past, but part of the attraction to the reform Jewish movement was a desire to be more mainstream. Everything was in English, and not in Hebrew. You could wear regular clothes. That sort of thing. Overall I think this is less common now, but of course different Jews define their Jewish-ness in different ways. I think it's interesting to hear people identifying themselves in that way, maybe as a joke or out of a desire to fit in.

intothewoods said:

Interesting. Well, this was more common in the past, but part of the attraction to the reform Jewish movement was a desire to be more mainstream. Everything was in English, and not in Hebrew. You could wear regular clothes. That sort of thing. Overall I think this is less common now, but of course different Jews define their Jewish-ness in different ways. I think it's interesting to hear people identifying themselves in that way, maybe as a joke or out of a desire to fit in.

Click to expand...

I can't imagine anyone who is serious about their Jewish identity (who thinks that their being Jewish, whether culturally, religiously, or both, is important to who they are as an individual) would refer to themselves as "Christian Jews" as anything but a joke. But, as I've learned many, many times over, it takes all kinds.

My father's family moved to the south quite a few generations ago, and so made a pretty good effort to try to fit in and make themselves more like the gentiles, but they never referred to themselves as Christians. They might not have made reference to themselves as Jews, instead choosing to gloss over the matter entirely, but they wouldn't have called themselves christians. It doesn't seem like the kind of thing that a Jew trying to fit in with the goyim would do.

But of course like you said, Jews define their Jewishness in all different ways. This could just be a definition that I've not yet encountered.

sadangel said:

Syd. No offense was intended. I said it as I thought I remembered it. I apolgize profusely for both getting it wrong and for offending. I was also saying it the way that at least three of my friends who are reformed Jews have said it to me...but I didn't mean to offend.

Click to expand...

And totally not offended! Don't worry about it. I'm just honestly surprised to hear that there are Jews who refer to themselves that way.

I've heard a ton of different beliefs from Jews (religious and cultural) regarding Jesus... nutshelled...

* Jesus wasn't real.
* Jesus was a nutcase/delusional
* Jesus was a fraud
* Jesus was a false prophet.
* Jesus was a political figure... anti-Roman occupation and whatnot.
* Jesus was actually the murderer who was freed.
* Jesus was a good rabbi, but not what Christians make him out to be, let alone the Messiah.
* Jesus was the Messiah, but not as represented in the Bible.
* Jesus was the Messiah as represented in the Bible.

Takes all sorts, I suppose.

Hmmm...turns out the latest scholarship suggests that Jesus didn't believe the Jews really existed.

Guess it's a stand off!

I don't see how the "arguably" most influential man in the history of the world could not have existed.

WriterDom said:

I don't see how the "arguably" most influential man in the history of the world could not have existed.

Click to expand...

Lack of historical record.

One of the single most important men in the field of philosophy (and thus science and law) may well have not existed either - Socrates.

I have never heard from anyone of Jewish descent that I have interacted with, personally, that Jesus, the historical figure, doesn't exist.

We tend to dig the factual.

I've never heard anything other than "nice guy, good rabbi if he wasn't so nuts, not the son of God."

I personally believe that Jesus was the first Reform Jew. Badly needed at the time.

Any "reform Jew" who believes that Jesus was the Messiah is in fact a Messianic Jew. This is the only Judaism which professes this, and is thus completely incompatible with the entire rest of Judaism. The only other people who seem to think the Messiah's been located are the Lubavitchers

LOL @ Christian Jews.

Jesus was probably a great leader and a teacher. That's where it stops. No miracles, no immaculate conception, etc. He was a real person, and he was significant to his community, but that's it.

Homburg said:

Lack of historical record.

One of the single most important men in the field of philosophy (and thus science and law) may well have not existed either - Socrates.

Click to expand...

Josephus (first century Jewish historian) did record, not only the existence of Jesus, but referred to Him as "a wise man." The complete version of Josephus' references to Jesus are under something of a cloud since he at the very least alludes to not only the divinity of Jesus, but actually calls Him "the Messiah."

As that distinction would almost certainly have caused the conversion of Josephus to Christianity, and as he even more certainly did not convert, there are those who believe the original words of Josephus were, um, 'messed with' by over-zealous Christians. eek: Say it isn't so, Joe!) Gotta say, even as a Christian, ain't no damn way Josephus said all that; Still, there doesn't seem to be any dispute that he did indeed mention Jesus and in the 'wise man' appellation.

Ravenwind said:

I've heard a ton of different beliefs from Jews (religious and cultural) regarding Jesus... nutshelled...

<snip>

Takes all sorts, I suppose.

Click to expand...

My mother used to say this constantly as I was growing up, usually in an effort to calm my passionate outrage at prejudice/injustice/etc.

Finally one day I shot back, "It doesn't "take" all sorts, Mum - we've just got them."

yourmissl said:

Josephus (first century Jewish historian) did record, not only the existence of Jesus, but referred to Him as "a wise man." The complete version of Josephus' references to Jesus are under something of a cloud since he at the very least alludes to not only the divinity of Jesus, but actually calls Him "the Messiah."

As that distinction would almost certainly have caused the conversion of Josephus to Christianity, and as he even more certainly did not convert, there are those who believe the original words of Josephus were, um, 'messed with' by over-zealous Christians. eek: Say it isn't so, Joe!) Gotta say, even as a Christian, ain't no damn way Josephus said all that; Still, there doesn't seem to be any dispute that he did indeed mention Jesus and in the 'wise man' appellation.

Click to expand...

Pontius Pilate was attributed with the execution of Jesus. He ruled from 26-36AD. Josephus was born in 37AD. By default, this is hearsay, not direct historical record. That passage, while as close as anything to historical record, has been rather heavily debated and questioned.

It is also interesting to note that the person that brought that passage to scholarly attention was Eusebius, who was noted for openly approving of the use of fraud and deception to advance the church. Not the most reliable of sources. There is other work out there that shows that the testimony Eusebius referred to was not the same as the one Josephus wrote as well. It's interesting stuff.

Fraud is a significant part of the problem here. So many people are invested in proving the historical existence of the Christ that anything that might be record is subjected to severely intense scrutiny, sometimes to the point of being arguably over-rigourous. *shrug* My attitude towards that is to bring up the story of the boy who cried 'wolf'. The supposed osseum of "James, brother of Jeshua" that was 'discovered' a few years back is a particularly high-profile example.

--

Note: I'm not arguing that he did not exist. That is an impossible argument simply because you cannot prove a negative. Jesus may well have existed, but the lack of strong historical record is the reason why some people argue that he did not exist.

You'd think that a carpenter that became as famous a figure as he was might have left a chair or two behind. "Hey, careful there, Marius. That chair was made by that crazy guy the Christians follow. Yeah, the one the Romans nailed to a crucifix."