Essentially, you're making a mountain out of a molehill here.
It's true that the scribes and Pharisees didn't accept Jesus as
the expected messiah, but many Jews did accept that he
fulfilled the prophecies. Jesus Christ was both priest and
Ah, but they do not accept him as the physical and literal son of God. Why? Because that is an incorrect interpretation of the term.
Most Jews do not believe that the prophecies have been fulfilled. Those events haven't occurred yet. For example, where's the Temple? Christ didn't get around to that, obviously. They may have had great hope for him, but he failed.
The whole idea of the Christ-is-god is alien to Judaism. It's an article of Jewish faith that God doesn't share his power with anyone (God as One). In other words, he has no equal, so elevating Christ to god-like status is incompatible with Judaism.
I disagree that Christ was both priest and king. He was a king. John the Baptist was a priest. (And, in fact, there's a whole branch of Christianity that traces its teachings not to Christ but to John.)
There are two expressions of the term. It's true that there were sons of God referred to in the OT, but Christ demonstrated and stated he was the Son of God.
He had every right to call himself the Son of God. As an Anointed One, it was his rightful title, so why shouldn't he use it?
What two expressions are we talking about? I've mentioned one. What's the other?
Prove it. We have no idea what he might and might not have advocated. If he was an Essene and the Essenes had their roots in ancient Egypt, he very well may have done just that. All we have to go by is the Bible, and we can't very well rely on that for accuracy. I know what you're going to say--that the Bible is unimpeachable as a source and you'll use that as your evidence. I strongly disagree with that.Quote
There are some similarities between Christ and the so-called Pagan Sun deities, but Christ never advocated Paganism or Sun worship...
, and unlike the Solar
> figures, he sacrificed his life for the potential redemption of
> others. None of the solar deities did that. There is also the
> factor of divine mimicry, which I can outline for you in more
> detail, if you so wish. Judaism does not have its roots in
> Pagan Egyptian and Babylonian religion. [/quote]
Judaism has a long and storied history with paganism. How long were the Israelites in Egypt? Four hundred years? Jewish tradition holds that the Israelites were the descendants of Jacob's twelve sons (one of whom was named Judah), who settled in Egypt. To say they didn't absorb anything from the Egyptians strains credulity, Rob. How long did they spend in Babylonia during two captivities? They did not become monotheistic until after the return from Babylon. I call them Israelites because that's what everyone knows them as, but there was no such thing as that yet. They were descended from the Hebrews, and after the Exodus settled in Canaan, which was definitely pagan! Let's not forget the story of the Golden Calf. Since you believe the Bible is infallible, you have to admit that that this shows that the Israelites were not monotheistic.