i am trying to understand why some people are so sure that jesus is the messiah while others are equally sure he is not.
because for both camps getting an answer that matches their beliefs is really, really important! if jesus *was* the jewish messiah, then christians would be right and we would have a whole raft of stuff to deal with. equally, if we are right and he wasn't, then christians have to completely rework their theology. being jewish, we were the people to originally define the category messiahship, as it were, so we just use our texts and our interpretations with the results already noted. so, basically, the argument goes, "these are the criteria, jesus doesn't fulfil them, end of argument." because christians do not accept the same criteria (for whatever reason) they don't accept the result of the process driven by those criteria and categories.
i have heard jewish complaints that the christians have tampered with translations of the jewish scriptures, for example using capital letters for Lord where there are no capitals in hebrew, so i wanted to ask someone who is christian but specifically jewish christian who can understand the hebrew scriptures why they have decided to accept the christian viewpoint.
oh, i see. well, they might be convinced by the arguments put forward to link the figure of jesus both linguistically and metaphorically to all the references that are said to be to him. i note there's a thread over in the christianity forum that is arguing somehow that certain Divine Names in genesis are in fact prophetic visions of jesus appearing to abraham and so on. needless to say, from my PoV these have absolutely no credibility and their persuasiveness is entirely rhetorical, or belief-based if you prefer.
is it a question of interpretation? how much of the problem is down to interpretation and how much is specific tampering. as i cannot read hebrew myself it is very difficult for me to try to make sense of the differences.
this is quite a big issue, you see, because it is impossible to actually make sense of what a given verse means without some knowledge of hebrew and its context. otherwise, you're at the mercy of the spin of the translator. in fact, we would say that without a knowledge of the oral tradition that goes with the written text you're really still nowhere at all. christians in general are unaware of the oral tradition and what it says, even such basic commentaries as that of rashi (france, C12th). in a way, it really comes down to who you *trust* - you always end up having to either trust a tradition, a translator, a teacher or an interpreter at some point. and, obviously, i am, like others, more likely to trust people who have the same values as myself. the question then becomes to what extent you take your questioning of your sources and what attitude you have to criticising them. if one is to believe academics, for example, anything that isn't from a university is automatically suspect, whereas from the PoV of some traditionalists, voices from outside the tradition have nothing to teach those inside it. i think both points of view are extreme. my understanding of the book of leviticus, for example, has been transformed by the work of the catholic anthrologist dr mary douglas and my understanding of maimonides' "guide to the perplexed" and the Temple service has likewise been informed by a combination of academics and traditionalists. the trick is in knowing who has which axe to grind and when to take them with a pinch of salt. nobody should be entirely exempt all the time - particularly academics. everyone has an agenda.
i have been asking about the age of the oldest jewish scriptures still in existence.....and people have been telling me the dates of the origins of the books. what i am asking about is physical books still in existence......meaning can you check your copies of books now with "originals" from 1000 years ago? 2000? for corrupted texts or lack of corruption? thank you for your help.
i believe the oldest copies of the jewish scriptures extant are the aleppo and leningrad codexes, but i don't know how old they are. about 2000 years i think. maybe not as old as the dead sea scrolls, but i don't really know. but, yes, we can still check our copies of books with originals and we know about every single letter, dot or variant, who is supposed to have written, added or changed what. the only thing i am fundamentally obliged to believe as far as i am aware is that G!D gave the letters of the pentateuch/Torah to moses, who wrote them down, although some authorities suggest that he dictated the last few verses to joshua.
b'shalom
bananabrain