Where did Moses write about Jesus?

John 5:46 "For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me."

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/jn/5.html#46

Originally posted by AThousandYoung
John 5:46 "For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me; for he wrote of me."

http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/jn/5.html#46

Nowhere.

Traditionally, Moses was considered to be the author of the first five books (the Torah, strictly defined), so this could be taken as an allusion to the whole of Torah. Nevertheless, the only way you can do it is to first assume Jesus was the Jewish messiah, and then to read the Torah “backwards through the looking-glass” of the New Testament.

Although there were groups possessed of great messianic fervor during the so-called “inter-testamental period,” they were not a majority, and only one group of them survived: the ones who were to become called Christians. After a sufficient number of messianic disasters, rabbinical Judaism learned caution about messianism: “If you are holding a sapling in your hand, and someone says to you that the Messiah is here, first plant the sapling...” (Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai).

deuteronomy 18:15,19

"The Lord your God will raise up from you a prophet like me from among your own brothers. You must listen to him...If anyone does not listen to my words that the prophet speaks in my name, I (the Lord) myself will call him to account."

i think this is considered to be talking about Jesus-by my understanding most of the other prophets meerly tried to emphasise the Law to the people, while Jesus actually had real revelations (well-he was God, thus whatever he says was a revelation...😛), it wasn't just a re-hash of the Law. thus, you were accountable to what he said rather than to the Law.

Originally posted by vistesd
Nevertheless, the only way you can do it is to first assume Jesus was the Jewish messiah, and then to read the Torah “backwards through the looking-glass” of the New Testament.

are you trying to say that the OT doesn't mention a messiah?

Originally posted by genius
are you trying to say that the OT doesn't mention a messiah?

Hi, G—

Wherever you find the English word “anointed” in the Hebrew Scriptures, the underlying Hebrew word is mashach (verb); as a noun it is mashiach, from which is derived messiah. Just a few examples:

Numbers 3:3—the “anointed priests”: ha’m’shechim (the word "priests" does not actually appear, but is inferred clearly from the context).*

Samuel 24:10—where David calls Saul mashiach YHVH (Saul is referred to as the anointed one often in 1 Samuel. Later it is David.) BTW; we are now out of the “Torah of Moses,” proper.**

Isaiah 45:1—Isaiah calls King Cyrus m’shichu, “his [YHVH’s] messiah.”

You can do a word search in the Hebrew Scriptures. Messiah refers to anyone viewed as anointed by God (or the priests) for a purpose. Jews, like Christians, have interpreted what are viewed as messiah prophecies—and have interpreted them variously. As I said, Christians interpret them by looking back through a New Testament lens—part of what I call the “Christian midrash.” Similarly, gospel writers could search d’rash out the HS for messianic prophecies to serve as “proof texts” because they already viewed Jesus in a messianic light (e.g., your Deuteronomy quote).

It makes sense that a Christian would take the NT as the fundamental hermeneutical lens for reading the HS. It does not make sense for a Christian to expect someone who does not accept the revelatory authority, for lack of a better handle, of the NT to do read the texts the same way—nor to be offended when they do not (and vice-versa, absent the attempt at conversion).

If you honestly want to know why Jews do not think Jesus was the messiah—and they have good reasons—I can suggest some further reading. The most I could do would be to list some of the highlights in a kind of patchwork way—I have no interest nor intention to get into an argument about it, since we would simply be at a hermeneutical impasse at the get-go; the whole Jewish hermeneutical framework, understanding and approach is vastly different from the general Christian one (some of this is based on the Hebrew language itself).

* The letter chet is sometimes transliterated as a “ch,” and is pronounced something like a soft Scottish ch in “loch”; sometimes it is transliterated as an “h” (usually with a dot under it).

** “Torah,” which is probably best translated as “teaching” (though, as usual with Hebrew, a single-word translation constricts the original considerably) can be used to refer to: (1) the first five books of Moses (the “Torah of Moshe” ); (2) the entire Tanach (Hebrew Scriptures); (3) the “dual Torah”—that is, the oral Torah as well as the written; or (4) any Judaic religious teaching, e.g., an exegesis of a Torah-text by a rabbi—“here is my torah...”.

Originally posted by vistesd
Hi, G—

Wherever you find the English word “anointed” in the Hebrew Scriptures, the underlying Hebrew word is mashach (verb); as a noun it is mashiach, from which is derived messiah. Just a few examples:

Numbers 3:3—the “anointed priests”: ha’m’shechim (the word "priests" does not actually appear, but is inferred clearly from the contex ...[text shortened]... Judaic religious teaching, e.g., an exegesis of a Torah-text by a rabbi—“here is my torah...”.

Did Moses write Deuteronomy 34 ?

Originally posted by frogstomp
Did Moses write Deuteronomy 34 ?

LOL!!

It says somewhere in the Talmud, that beginning with 34:1, he wrote “with tears in his eyes...”

I think that’s a wonderful tongue-in-cheek statement—but that’s because I don’t take any of it “literally.” Some Orthodox Jews may—but even then, not in the same way... As far as I can tell, most Reform and Reconstructionist Jews take it all as stories: myth, parable, fable, poetry, allegory, etc.—and, yes, some “Nightmare on Elm Street” horror stories—and some historical references woven in.

There is no lack of humor in the Jewish approach, and this stuff should not always be read with deadpan seriousness.

Originally posted by vistesd
LOL!!

It says somewhere in the Talmud, that beginning with 34:1, he wrote “with tears in his eyes...”

I think that’s a wonderful tongue-in-cheek statement—but that’s because I don’t take any of it “literally.” Some Orthodox Jews may—but even then, not in the same way... As far as I can tell, most Reform and Reconstructionist Jews take it all as humor in the Jewish approach, and this stuff should not always be read with deadpan seriousness.

With deapan seriousness isn't exactly the way I read it either.

Originally posted by frogstomp
With deapan seriousness isn't exactly the way I read it either.

I know, brother, I know....

Actually, in my efforts to save mythology from being turned into fantasy by being read literally--I may be more guilty of that than you.

Originally posted by vistesd
I know, brother, I know....

Actually, in my efforts to save mythology from being turned into fantasy by being read literally--I may be more guilty of that than you.

What really is funny though is that the mythological writings of the Sumerians are seen for what they are , but the biblical retelling of the same stories are bantered about as word of God.

Originally posted by frogstomp
With deapan seriousness isn't exactly the way I read it either.

The funniest film Woody Allen never made: Torah Torah Torah!

Originally posted by frogstomp
What really is funny though is that the mythological writings of the Sumerians are seen for what they are , but the biblical retelling of the same stories are bantered about as word of God.

Agreed. My personal hypothesis is that the old-storytellers (and the redactors who weaved them into the early written texts) knew what they were about. Even with the interweaving of historical events (rather like a historical novel) into a literary form that I call “histo-myth” (or “mythtery” 😉 ).

Frankly, since my revisiting here, I am finding that my heart really isn’t in the argument so much anymore... I have been exploring the possibility of finding someone who would take me on to do some real talmid Torah, perhaps at a Reform synagogue, but I’m not sure the logistics will work out, or even whether I still want to.

Originally posted by Bosse de Nage
The funniest film Woody Allen never made: Torah Torah Torah!

You're kidding, right? I went searching for it...

Originally posted by genius
deuteronomy 18:15,19

"The Lord your God will raise up from you a prophet like me from among your own brothers. You must listen to him...If anyone does not listen to my words that the prophet speaks in my name, I (the Lord) myself will call him to account."

The most Moses-like prophet that I can think of is Mohammed.

Originally posted by vistesd
You're kidding, right? I went searching for it...

You mean you haven't seen it?