Jesus in old testament

[Waggles]

The various appearances of Jesus in the OT was rather more angelic and fearful.
We often read of people throwing themselves facedown upon the earth and people becoming fearful.
In the NT God comes as prophesied in the form of a man - humble, of no reputation, a nobody performing many wonderful
miracles and healings - yet rather than restoring "Israel" to worldly power and glory - he confronts and challenges the prestige
and authority and religiosity of the ruling Temple priesthood and Sanhedrin.
This was not what the ruling class wanted to see and hear.
'My kingdom is not of this world.'

John 6:66 [note the numbers]
From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.

 

[Adstar]

Isaiah 54: KJV
5 "For thy Maker is thine husband; the LORD of hosts is his name; and thy Redeemer the Holy One of Israel; The God of the whole earth shall he be called."

2 Corinthians 11: KJV
2 "For I am jealous over you with godly jealousy: for I have espoused you to one husband, that I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ."

Revelation 21: KJV
" {2} And I John saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband."

Luke 4: KJV
33 "¶ And in the synagogue there was a man, which had a spirit of an unclean devil, and cried out with a loud voice, {34} Saying, Let us alone; what have we to do with thee, thou Jesus of Nazareth? art thou come to destroy us? I know thee who thou art; the Holy One of God. {35} And Jesus rebuked him, saying, Hold thy peace, and come out of him. And when the devil had thrown him in the midst, he came out of him, and hurt him not."

 

[Macabeus]

I have.
I'm afraid they don't answer the question I raised in my previous post, that you quoted, in this thread.

Thanks

Your question was...

The people interacting with God/Jesus in those times accepted God for being God, or Jesus for being God incarnate, when He appeared to people in the OT.

The Jews later did not accept Jesus as being God incarnate.
Why?

I'm NOT asking why the Jews didn't accept Jesus, but specifically why people way back in the old testament did but then the Jews didn't.

Well, the first thing I didnt catch was "incarnate" in the OT. The Theophanies were not incarnations in the OT in the sense of incarnation in the New Testament. The Old Testament theophanies were visible appearances, but the Incarnation was much more. God assuming a full human nature, being born, living a human life, growing up as the "neighbor kid from down the street", etc. This never happened in the OT. This was an entirely new thing that God was doing.

Besides that important detail, I gave five scriptural answers.

a. Many Jews actually DID believe on Jesus.

b. Many believed on Him but departed from Him because of His teachings. (John 6:60;66)

c. Many did not believe, because Jesus did not fit the Messianic expectation.

d. No one was able to believe on Him unless it was given to them of the Father. (John 6:44; John 6:65)

e. It was by God's determinate council and foreknowledge that Jesus would be crucified.

And I will add this...

f. The Jews were seeking a sign, but even though Jesus gave them MANY signs, they did not believe.

and

g. The Theophanies in the Old Testament did not involve the "neighborhood boy" down the street claiming He was God. The Jews throughout history knew about theophanies, but an incarnation (God being born as and living as a human), had never happened. God was doing something new, and although it was foretold in the Old Testament, the Jews did not fully understand those particular scripures.

There's seven reasons. Maybe at least one will suit you, but they are all in the New Testament scriptures.

 

[posthuman]

Was God appearing in such a way that made it obvious to ALL that it was God, i.e. in a different manner of appearing than Jesus?

no, not always.

have a look at Judges 13 - - 'the' angel of YHVH appeared to Samson's mother, and then also to his father, prophesying his birth. at first they did not know it was even an angel, and only realized who it was when The Angel of YHVH ascended in the flame. at that point they said, we have seen God!

if we believe the scripture is true when it says no one can see God and live, and that no one has ever seen God, except that the Son revealed Him, and as Jesus says if you have seen Him you have seen the Father, then the conclusion is obvious - "The Angel of the LORD" = Christ Jesus

and what touches on the OP question is this - He hides Himself, so that we as humans only comprehend what it is we see when He reveals Himself. to Samson's parents He was not revealed until He departed, and to the Jews whose eyes are still not opened, they do not see either until His appointed time. if you see Him? thank and praise God He has shown Himself to you!!

 

[LPT]

The various appearances of Jesus in the OT was rather more angelic and fearful.
We often read of people throwing themselves facedown upon the earth and people becoming fearful.
In the NT God comes as prophesied in the form of a man - humble, of no reputation, a nobody performing many wonderful
miracles and healings - yet rather than restoring "Israel" to worldly power and glory - he confronts and challenges the prestige
and authority and religiosity of the ruling Temple priesthood and Sanhedrin.
This was not what the ruling class wanted to see and hear.
'My kingdom is not of this world.'

John 6:66 [note the numbers]
From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.

I wouldn’t give to much weight to the number system in the Bible that was added around 1550AD

 

[jaybird88]

It is often said that God in human form (Jesus) appeared in the old testament.

Examples:

Prior to the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah.

Meeting up a mountain.

The assertion that people were meeting Jesus in these cases is just that, an assertion, and the Bible doesn't actually say this.
It is asserted by people to overcome the contradiction that would arise by virtue of something the Bible goes on to state later: that people cannot see the face of God and survive.

A question about this.

The people interacting with God/Jesus in those times accepted God for being God, or Jesus for being God incarnate, when He appeared to people in the OT.

The Jews later did not accept Jesus as being God incarnate.
Why?

I'm NOT asking why the Jews didn't accept Jesus, but specifically why people way back in the old testament did but then the Jews didn't.

Was there a difference with how God appeared that immediately convinced people in earlier times (i.e. it wasn't Jesus)?

Were more modern Jews (in Jesus' time) less able to discern fact from fiction than Jews way back in the old testament?

what ever Jesus was teaching the Jews didnt seem to have a problem with it, crowds followed Him everywhere and every one of His disciples were Jewish. then a few hundred years after Jesus ascended the debate begins on "is Jesus the Most High" and right at this time is when Jews in general started rejecting the faith. something changed. i wonder what it was?

 

[devoiler]

Would anyone reading this accept that Jesus, at any time, was capable of evil thoughts?

 

[Macabeus]

Ok, thanks for your replies.

This is the kind of rigorous thinking I like to see applied when answering questions, rather than mere assertion based upon tradition or accepted wisdom.

It was God that people met in the early testament:
Adam & Eve in the garden of Eden after they had sinned,
Meeting up a mountain,
Appearing before the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah.

But was it Jesus, or God in a different form...
The Jews didn't accept Jesus as being God but the earlier people (e.g. above) accepted whatever they were seeing as being God, without question.
Was God appearing in such a way that made it obvious to ALL that it was God, i.e. in a different manner of appearing than Jesus?

I hope my question is clear.

Yes, as said yesterday, the incarnation, God the Son born, growing up in the neighborhood, etc only happened once.

 

[devoiler]

Had to rush off before completing my last post. Here is an example of what I was referring to:

Exodus 32 (KJV)

9 And the Lord said unto Moses, I have seen this people, and, behold, it is a stiffnecked people:

10 Now therefore let me alone, that my wrath may wax hot against them, and that I may consume them: and I will make of thee a great nation.

11 And Moses besought the Lord his God, and said, Lord, why doth thy wrath wax hot against thy people, which thou hast brought forth out of the land of Egypt with great power, and with a mighty hand?

12 Wherefore should the Egyptians speak, and say, For mischief did he bring them out, to slay them in the mountains, and to consume them from the face of the earth? Turn from thy fierce wrath, and repent of this evil against thy people.

13 Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, thy servants, to whom thou swarest by thine own self, and saidst unto them, I will multiply your seed as the stars of heaven, and all this land that I have spoken of will I give unto your seed, and they shall inherit it for ever.

14 And the Lord repented of the evil which he thought to do unto his people.

If you think the LORD (God of the Israelites) is Jesus then you would have to accept that Jesus was capable of evil. I don't believe that is the case.

 

[Lanolin]

what ever Jesus was teaching the Jews didnt seem to have a problem with it, crowds followed Him everywhere and every one of His disciples were Jewish. then a few hundred years after Jesus ascended the debate begins on "is Jesus the Most High" and right at this time is when Jews in general started rejecting the faith. something changed. i wonder what it was?

I dont think it was 100 years later in the book of Acts soon after Jesus ascended there were jews and judaisers actively persecuting believers. Of which saul was one before he was converted and became Paul.

Galatians was especially written to address the judaisers that were rejecting faith in Jesus, who were leading the Galatians astray. Maybe 70 AD when the temple got destroyed completely was the turning point. The jews that were left that didnt believe had to band together and continue their traditions without a place to perform their rituals and sacrifices. They couldnt charge temple taxes etc without a temple.

 

[jaybird88]

I dont think it was 100 years later in the book of Acts soon after Jesus ascended there were jews and judaisers actively persecuting believers. Of which saul was one before he was converted and became Paul.

what kind of Jew was Saul? one with the authority to persecute this new Jewish sect. did your average everday Jew have that kind of authority? answer would be no. so Saul the persecutor would represent the Jewish leaders, a very small percent. i think its a pretty big leap to say the Jews in general rejected Jesus. and historians of the time say very different, when James was killed the the pharisees almost lost the city due to revolt, it takes an overwhelming majority united to make a city revolt.

Galatians was especially written to address the judaisers that were rejecting faith in Jesus, who were leading the Galatians astray. Maybe 70 AD when the temple got destroyed completely was the turning point. The jews that were left that didnt believe had to band together and continue their traditions without a place to perform their rituals and sacrifices. They couldnt charge temple taxes etc without a temple.

whats a Judaiser?

interesting that the death of James and the temple destruction (first James then temple destroyed) happened about the same time. and what changed after these events. the Nazerenes (sect of Jesus) gone, Essenes (sect of John B) gone, 1st church of Jeresalem (lead by James) gone. and the pharisees (allies of rome) are right back on top.

 

[Lanolin]

what kind of Jew was Saul? one with the authority to persecute this new Jewish sect. did your average everday Jew have that kind of authority? answer would be no. so Saul the persecutor would represent the Jewish leaders, a very small percent. i think its a pretty big leap to say the Jews in general rejected Jesus. and historians of the time say very different, when James was killed the the pharisees almost lost the city due to revolt, it takes an overwhelming majority united to make a city revolt.


whats a Judaiser?

interesting that the death of James and the temple destruction (first James then temple destroyed) happened about the same time. and what changed after these events. the Nazerenes (sect of Jesus) gone, Essenes (sect of John B) gone, 1st church of Jeresalem (lead by James) gone. and the pharisees (allies of rome) are right back on top.

Well there were certain groups collectively known as Pharisees and saduccees. Am not going to say all jews rejected Jesus, but it seemed no other group was against Jesus more than the house of Judah. Why, because they wanted to etablish their own kingdom. They didnt want the rest of Israel. They kicked the rest of Israel out. They wanted to slay Jesus, but got him crucified using the Romans instead.

The jews were the majority in the land/province of Judea. Which is where Jeruslaem is located.

 

[Lanolin]

Judaism..religion of the jews...jews are from the tribe of Judah, exalting their rule over the rest of Israel.
This is why revelation tells us the lion of the tribe of Judah slays the lamb. The lamb of God is Jesus who rose again.

Judaiser...someone who wants everyone to be circumcised as they are, in the flesh. But Jesus has made a new convenant and does not require flesh circumcision but spiritual circumcision of the heart.

 

[jaybird88]

Well there were certain groups collectively known as Pharisees and saduccees. Am not going to say all jews rejected Jesus, but it seemed no other group was against Jesus more than the house of Judah. Why, because they wanted to etablish their own kingdom. They didnt want the rest of Israel. They kicked the rest of Israel out. They wanted to slay Jesus, but got him crucified using the Romans instead.

The jews were the majority in the land/province of Judea. Which is where Jeruslaem is located.

if the house of Judah was against Jesus, why did the leaders have to plot against Jesus in secret? who were they scared of, bible says they feared the crowds, must have been some big crowds to scare the religious leaders with all the power.

 

[jaybird88]

Judaiser...someone who wants everyone to be circumcised as they are, in the flesh. But Jesus has made a new convenant and does not require flesh circumcision but spiritual circumcision of the heart.

so if someone wanted to follow the example of Jesus and be circumcised, like Jesus was, this is wrong?

 

[tourist]

so if someone wanted to follow the example of Jesus and be circumcised, like Jesus was, this is wrong?

Apparently.

 

[Macabeus]

so if someone wanted to follow the example of Jesus and be circumcised, like Jesus was, this is wrong?

Jesus was born under the Law and fulfilled the Law, so we are no longer under the ceremonial commandments of the Law.

Plus , keeping the Law never saved anyone. By the Law is the knowledge of sin

The Law reveals we are dead. The Gospel raises us to life. We are dead to the Law through Jesus, to be joined to (Jesus) so that we might bring forth fruit to God. Romans 7

Telling gentiles that they have to be circumcised and become Jews to be Christians, is missing the point of the New Covenant, and tragically ignoring the distinctness of the covenants.

 

[jaybird88]

Jesus was born under the Law and fulfilled the Law, so we are no longer under the ceremonial commandments of the Law.

Plus , keeping the Law never saved anyone. By the Law is the knowledge of sin

The Law reveals we are dead. The Gospel raises us to life. We are dead to the Law through Jesus, to be joined to (Jesus) so that we might bring forth fruit to God. Romans 7

Telling gentiles that they have to be circumcised and become Jews to be Christians, is missing the point of the New Covenant, and tragically ignoring the distinctness of the covenants.

so Christians looking for an example to follow should not look to Jesus as an example?

 

[Macabeus]

Jesus was born under the Law and fulfilled the Law, so we are no longer under the ceremonial commandments of the Law.

Plus , keeping the Law never saved anyone. By the Law is the knowledge of sin

The Law reveals we are dead. The Gospel raises us to life. We are dead to the Law through Jesus, to be joined to (Jesus) so that we might bring forth fruit to God. Romans 7

Telling gentiles that they have to be circumcised and become Jews to be Christians, is missing the point of the New Covenant, and tragically ignoring the distinctness of the covenants.

But no, circumcision is not wrong, unless you put it as a condition for salvation. The issue was the judaizers were telling gentile believers they could not be saved unless they were circumcised, which is a perverted, false gospel

 

[Macabeus]

so Christians looking for an example to follow should not look to Jesus as an example?

See post 59. I was replying the same time you were

Judaizers were false teachers with a corrupted gospel which was not the gospel at all. See book of Galatians

Follow Jesus’ example by loving as He loved.

But if you want to get circumcised go for it. Just don’t make it a condition for being a Christian, or else you have no true gospel