I recently talked with a Jewish acquaintance about Jesus being the Messiah. He gave me a list of reasons why Jews don’t believe that and asked me to answer them. I usually think pasting links with objections to Christianity are cheap, after all I may just link back to CARM.org and start a link pasting contest, but I decided to answer this one.

To start out, one of the main argument given against my attempts to explain OT scriptures is that I don’t know Hebrew, and since Jews read the Tanakh (which we call the OT. I will use OT in this post for simplicity’s sake) in Hebrew even today, the point was that translations cannot accurately reflect the meaning of the text.

While I agree that stuff gets lost in translation, it is generally possible to get a point across. It is that way between German, English, and Japanese, languages that are fundamentally different, and I think it is the same with Hebrew. If it were impossible to translate between languages and keep any amount of meaning, world news would be pointless. Watching foreign films would be pointless. We do watch world news and have probably seen a foreign film or two, so we don’t live like translations are totally meaningless, and a philosophy that isn’t lived out is not worth having.

Also, there are many Hebrew scholars out there who are Christians, some I am sure who are Jews also, who can translate Hebrew to English and keep the meaning very similar. To make up for personal interpretation by those scholars, it’s helpful to read a wide array of translations to compare how different Hebrew scholars translate certain passages.

It’s also interesting to note that there are several English translations of the Tanakh made by Jewish scholars. Surely they wouldn’t waste their time if the meaning cannot be transferred.

Just to clarify, translations aren’t infallible, neither are the manuscripts it is translated from, only the autographs are. I probably explained textual criticism before, so just search my blog.

Now, let’s look at the list of reasons. I will keep the original numbering so you can cross reference the arguments made.

1) JESUS DID NOT FULFILL THE MESSIANIC PROPHECIES

A. – D.: These can be summarized in one. Just as the article says, the bible says Jesus/God will fulfill these prophecies and promises at the Second Coming, which is indeed a concept of the NT and not in the OT to my knowledge. That doesn’t make it invalid though. Jesus is still alive, and nowhere does the OT say these prophecies have to be fulfilled by the year 2008 or else they are false. The text simply says those things will happen, and the bible agrees. This is not a problem.

2) JESUS DID NOT EMBODY THE PERSONAL QUALIFICATIONS OF MESSIAH

A. MESSIAH AS PROPHET

I’d like to know where it says that prophecy will cease with Haggai, Zechariah and Malachi. In fact, Malachi 4:4 talks about God sending Elijah the prophet before the terrible day of the Lord. John the Baptist came in the spirit of Elijah, as Jesus explains in Matthew 11:14.

Jesus also prophesied. In Matthew 24:1-2 he said the temple would be destroyed, which happened in A.D. 70.¹ Matthew 24 and the latter part of 25 are full of prophecies about the end times, most of which haven’t been fulfilled yet either, which again doesn’t make them invalid.

B. DESCENDENT OF DAVID

This is an interesting one. According to the NT, Jesus was in the line of David by blood through Mary, and as the son -though not biologically, but by adoption- of Joseph, he was also in the line of David through his father. The fact that the lineage was traced through the woman is not unheard of (cf 1 Chronicles 2). The daughters of Zelophehad were without brothers but had their descendants traced through them, the maternal line. Jair’s father is in the line of Judah according to 1 Chronicles 2:22, but Jair is described as a son of Manasseh in Numbers 32:41, indicating that his mother must have been from the tribe of Manasseh and his genealogy traced through her.

Not only was Jesus in the line of David, he was also greater than David due to his divine attributes, which is perfectly accounted for in the virgin birth (Matthew 22:44ff, quoting Psalm 110:1ff)

C. TORAH OBSERVANCE

What Deut. 13:1-4 is talking about is indeed false prophets that lead Israel astray to worship false gods, which did happen. So if anyone told Israel to worship gods they have not known, he is a false prophet. The verse before, Deut 12:32, does mention something about not adding or taking away from the commandments, which is true as well. However, what happened in the NT is God himself giving further revelation, both as God the Father as well as God the Son. This passage in Deut is about people twisting and perverting God’s commandments, not about no further revelation ever being given by God.

Naturally, we need to see if Jesus was/is indeed God, which the NT clearly affirms – without the council of Nicea, thank you very much. But that’s a different story and worthy of further discussion.

About Jesus breaking the law in John 9:14 and other places I can just say that Jesus never broke the law; he fulfilled it perfectly. What the Pharisees didn’t understand was that God judges the heart. They refused to do good on the Sabbath and Jesus reprimanded them for it. It was the Pharisees legalistic rules that Jesus broke, not the Law of Moses. One example is Matthew 12:10ff.

Torah observance is a classic example of works righteousness which is rejected in Isaiah 64:6. Romans 3 may help clarify, especially passages quotes from the OT, such as Psalm 14:1-3 and others. No one is good, and no good deeds will ever change that.

Jeremiah 31 refers to this new covenant that the Messiah would usher in, implying that the old covenant would be obsolete. This new covenant would result in everyone knowing God (meaning not everyone knew God before) and their sin will be remembered no more. This is what Jesus accomplished. Through Jesus we have access to God and our sins are forgiven and paid for by him.

Additionally, Paul in Galatians 3:15-29 explains that the purpose of the law is to point to Messiah, to Christ.

3) MISTRANSLATED VERSES “REFERRING” TO JESUS

A. VIRGIN BIRTH

“alma” can indeed mean young woman, but it can also be translated as virgin. In fact, it is never used to designate anything other than an unmarried young woman and by that, a virgin. One example is Genesis 24:43, in which Rebekah is called alma, a young woman, and Genesis 24:16, in which she is called a betulah, a virgin. It also means virgin in Songs of Solomon 1:3 and 6:8.

Also take the context of the passage into account. God tells Ahaz to ask for a sign. God doesn’t do that very often, so this is a very special thing. Ahaz, in false piety, refuses and says he will not test the Lord. So God says he will give a sign: An “alma” will be with child! Now, what kind of sign is a young woman having a child? It’s not. It happens all the time. However, a virgin being with child is truly a magnificent sign!

There were no sexual relations between God and Mary, that’s ludicrous and a desperate attempt to deal with the virgin birth.

B. CRUCIFIXION

I don’t know much about Hebrew, but I can somewhat see this one, though I don’t think it’s quite accurate either. The NET translates this passage as: “Yes, wild dogs surround me – a gang of evil men crowd around me; like a lion they pin my hands and feet.” I suppose the word can mean both lion and to pierce, according to the Strong’s concordance, so it could be seen as a hint towards crucifixion. The passage is Psalm 22:16 in my bible, may be a numbering thing.

This is not the only passage that refers to God being pierced. Look at Zechariah 12:10, which says “And they will look unto me whom they have pierced,” clearly a parallel to Jesus’ piercing by the Roman soldier. There are more prophecies that were fulfilled by Jesus, such as Zechariah 9:9 et al.

C. SUFFERING SERVANT

That the suffering servant refers to Israel is kind of a stretch. Israel is the subject and addressee in chapter 52. In v.13 it talks about God’s servant who will be greatly exalted, “just as many were astonished at you” (emphasis mine). He clearly addresses Israel again, as a separate entity from the servant.

Furthermore, that this passage refers to the crusades is an empty assertion and speculation at best. I may comment on Isaiah 53 at some later point and show how it was fulfilled by Christ.

I’ve also never heard of St. Gregory, the 4th century Bishop of Nanianzus, which is probably in part because of my ignorance. Either way, it doesn’t really matter what he says. Let the bible speak for itself.

4) JEWISH BELIEF IS BASED SOLELY ON NATIONAL REVELATION

I agree that God would tell everyone about his religion, something I didn’t think he did with the Jews. His revelation was very specifically directed at his chosen people Israel. Only with Jesus and the new covenant was this expanded to the Gentiles, causing much confusion among the Jews. Acts 10:34 may help explain that.

About miracles. God used miracles sparingly, but always before some great new revelation. Moses is one example. Before the giving of the law, there were miracles, which God used to prove that he really is God. Whether or not the Jews believed Moses and by extension God is irrelevant. That said, of course miracles aren’t the foundation of our faith; the bible is. But just as there were miracles and revelation with Moses, so there were miracles and further revelation through Jesus and after that the apostles, who then wrote the NT by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, on which we base our faith (the bible that is, not the Holy Spirit).

This is interesting: “Judaism is not miracles. It is the personal eyewitness experience of every man, woman and child, standing at Mount Sinai 3,300 years ago.” I think we need to clarify that it was the experience of every Jewish man, woman, and child, since the Law was given to the Jews, not all nations. There were of course non-Jews who decided to follow God and the Jews and by that received the same blessing, but only because of the proximity to Israel.

5) CHRISTIANITY CONTRADICTS JEWISH THEOLOGY

These parts are my favorite. They are such gross misrepresentations of Christian theology it’s almost sad. It also seems to take a lot of doctrine from the catholic church that I don’t agree with either and would call unbiblical.

A. GOD AS THREE?

The definition of the Trinity says that God exists in three distinct persons who are one in essence. So there is one God in the person of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit, not separate gods, like e.g. Mormonism says. Just to be clear, there is only one God. One. Jesus affirms that when he says “I and the Father are one” (John 10:30).

B. MAN AS GOD?

Jesus was 100% man and 100% God. He was both. The person Jesus is very unique, there is no one like him. He was fully God and fully Man. How does it work exactly? I have no idea. But it certainly doesn’t make God a man or vice versa. I may write more about the person of Jesus at a later time and his role in God’s plan of redemption. I thought I already had but a search didn’t reveal much.

C. INTERMEDIARY FOR PRAYER?

Jesus saying that no man comes to the father except by him is taken out of context. I, as a Christian, can be in the presence of God as well as pray to him. Jews could pray to him, but only very few people (Moses, the High Priest) could enter God’s presence, in the tent of meeting or the Holy of Holies.

What Jesus meant is that no one can get to the father in the first place because of their sin (Isaiah 59:2). God is so holy that no one who isn’t perfect can approach him. God sanctified the High Priest so that he could, as well as the Levites for serving God, e.g. touching the ark of the covenant. Under the new covenant, Jesus’ perfect righteousness is imputed on me by repenting from my sins and trusting in Christ to forgive my sins, so that in God’s eyes I am perfect and holy; not by anything I did, but by his grace and for his glory.

Also, I’d like to know how Jesus as mediator is the same as putting another god before God.

D. INVOLVEMENT IN THE PHYSICAL WORLD

I think we should be very involved in this world, which is what the bible commands, also (Matthew 28:18ff). I am not a Roman Catholic and don’t hold to their view on this issue, so my worldview in this regard is very close to the Jewish worldview.

6) JEWS AND GENTILES

The seven laws of Noah are yet another example of works righteousness, which I showed above is not enough to stand before a perfectly holy God. To press the point further, consider these passages. Habakkuk 2:4 – “the righteous man shall live by his faith.” Gen 15:6 – “Abraham believed God and it was imputed to him as righteousness.” One cannot be righteous in God’s eyes without faith in the only true God. No amount of works will do the trick. That includes both Jews and Gentiles.

7) BRINGING THE MESSIAH

Millions now believe in the God of Israel because of Jesus.

I don’t see how the Law can perfect anything. It condemns and shows just how wicked we are. Living by the Torah must be a frustrating thing. Just looking at the 10 commandments (9, rather, since #4 isn’t repeated in the NT), I have broken every single one of them. Being judged by them and trying to live by them is a nightmare in my eyes. I thank God for the freedom that I have in Christ and his redemptive work in me!

RANDOM REMARKS

Daniel prophesies in Daniel 9:26 that the Messiah must come after the temple is rebuilt (v 25) and before it’s destroyed. The second temple was destroyed in A.D. 70. If Jesus isn’t the Messiah, I am afraid there is no Messiah ever coming.

I’d be happy to go into more details on some of those points and explain them further.

1. As a side note, the fact that none of the NT scriptures mention the fulfillment of this prophecy hints that they were all written prior to A.D. 70. [↩]

Agnosticism, from the greek negative “a” and “gnosis” – knowledge, means without knowledge or no knowledge and deals not so much with the existence of God, but more his attributes and character, or lack of “knowability” of them.
It asserts that we cannot know about God because the concept of God is simply too much for a finite mind.

If you noticed the problem in my last sentence, congratulations! The argument would go like this:

1. God is infinite and unlimited
2. Man is finite and limited
3. Therefore man cannot know God

However, as per the premise, we already know that God is infinite and unlimited, so we know something about God. Does agnosticism have a point? Well, maybe. Is God infinite and unlimited? Definitely. Is man finite and limited? Of course. The conclusion would be correct if we changed it slightly by adding one word: exhaustively. Man cannot know God exhaustively. Does that pose a problem for the Christian? Not really, because we can indeed know God at some level, and I go so far as to say that thanks to the Bible, we can know God sufficiently.

What, then, is sufficient knowledge of God? We can know all about God that God wants us to know about Him. We can definitely know who we are and who God is, ontologically. We can know that we are fallen and don’t hold up to God’s perfect law and standard. We can know that we cannot be reconciled to God no matter what we do. We can know that God had to step in if He ever wanted to have/restore fellowship with Him, and indeed did by sending His Son Jesus, the God-Man, to redeem us by paying the penalty for sin, which we can accept by repenting and putting our faith in Him.

That’s a lot of stuff we can know already, though none of these is complete or exhaustive knowledge. And believe me when I say, that is only the beginning of how much we can know God and know about God, by far.