Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

JC was NOT the messiah!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by freelight View Post
    What messianic promises and scriptures revealed in the article are false then and DO NOT apply to the Jewish Messiah? Then show when and where Jesus fulfilled any of those requirements. The glaring problem is still there, unless you can prove Jesus fulfilled them which he DID NOT. You can then fall back to plan B measure and say with many others,..."oh, hes coming back again to fulfill at that", which is a statement of futuristic faith. It is a mere belief. Is this your position, the he will come back and fulfill all the prophesies and requirements to prove his Messiahood, IF/WHEN he returns? Otherwise, the big fat ZERO on his score card is the big while elephant in the room. You could of course just spiritualize it all, and enjoy the inner Christ within, as your heaven, and promise of immortality. You do have many options to explore and consider
    Shalom.

    You should look at the prophecies that Jesus did fulfill and consider if what you are looking at is prophecies to be fulfilled by Jesus, whether He did or not.

    Shalom.

    Jacob

    Comment


    • Doctoring scripture..................

      Originally posted by Nihilo View Post

      There oughtn't be any interpretation involved, but merely reading what 1st century Judah believed at that time. Of course everything since then is post-Resurrection, so only what was believed before AD 33 is valid. And among other things, Judah believed the Messiah would be born of a Virgin, in Bethlehem.
      The Virgin Birth has many problems, even beyond the translation issue of Is. 7:14, we've treated this in other threads,....there is no proof the Messiah NEEDS to be virgin-born, since a Messiah can still fulfill his mission as God's Anointed Agent, without such supernatural origins.

      Concerning the so called 'messianic prophecy' in Micah 5:1-2, Uri Yosef also addressed its proper translation here

      I don't see any evidence that 'Judah' (or whoever) believed the messiah would be born of a virgin, neither necessarily in the town of 'Bethelehem', since the passage in Micah points to 'David' whose family lineage originates from 'Bethelehem' of Judea, since the Messiah comes forth from the lineage of David, the son of Jesse. The above pdf goes clearly into this, and more concerning the right translation and best possible interpretations of the original Hebrew text.


      sigpic

      Our Real Nature
      freelight's cosmic cafe
      Free-light-Express

      ~*~*~
      Resource Nexus l Theosophical Studies l Esoteric School of Gnostic Wisdom l Sanatana Dharma lAdidaml Facebook l Thread Catalog & History

      Comment


      • Originally posted by freelight View Post
        The Virgin Birth has many problems, even beyond the translation issue of Is. 7:14, we've treated this in other threads,....there is no proof the Messiah NEEDS to be virgin-born, since a Messiah can still fulfill his mission as God's Anointed Agent, without such supernatural origins.

        Concerning the so called 'messianic prophecy' in Micah 5:1-2, Uri Yosef also addressed its proper translation here

        I don't see any evidence that 'Judah' (or whoever) believed the messiah would be born of a virgin, neither necessarily in the town of 'Bethelehem', since the passage in Micah points to 'David' whose family lineage originates from 'Bethelehem' of Judea, since the Messiah comes forth from the lineage of David, the son of Jesse. The above pdf goes clearly into this, and more concerning the right translation and best possible interpretations of the original Hebrew text.
        It doesn't matter what anybody thinks today about the interpretation, because it's done in the Church age, so it is not unbiased, and cannot be unbiased. Jews need to trust their ancestors who lived at the time of Christ, that what they believed then about the Messiah, is the only interpretation that matters, and much of that interpretation that the Jewish ancestors held, is recorded for us quite neatly and cleanly in the various books of the New Testament. They believed that He would be born to the Virgin, and that He would be born in Bethlehem, just as King Herod learned when he inquired of the best experts of the Jewish faith at the time, when Herod was looking for the Christ Child, just as it is neatly and cleanly recorded in the New Testament.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Nihilo View Post
          It doesn't matter what anybody thinks today about the interpretation, because it's done in the Church age, so it is not unbiased, and cannot be unbiased. Jews need to trust their ancestors who lived at the time of Christ, that what they believed then about the Messiah, is the only interpretation that matters, and much of that interpretation that the Jewish ancestors held, is recorded for us quite neatly and cleanly in the various books of the New Testament. They believed that He would be born to the Virgin, and that He would be born in Bethlehem, just as King Herod learned when he inquired of the best experts of the Jewish faith at the time, when Herod was looking for the Christ Child, just as it is neatly and cleanly recorded in the New Testament.
          Religious traditions included or excluded, or whatever 'interpretations' are assumed, I think it best for anyone involved and using the story for their own edification to see what meaning and value the STORY can communicate, and if it can serve to inspire, empower or better a person to love, appreciate and serve 'God', then Hallelu-YAH

          All else is indeed interesting from various Jewish or Christian perspectives when diving into details, but at the end of the day, its what the stories teach and communicate that matters, if they have any value whatsoever.


          sigpic

          Our Real Nature
          freelight's cosmic cafe
          Free-light-Express

          ~*~*~
          Resource Nexus l Theosophical Studies l Esoteric School of Gnostic Wisdom l Sanatana Dharma lAdidaml Facebook l Thread Catalog & History

          Comment


          • Plus seeing the motifs Galatians 4:24 these stories morphed from dethrones the historical version being some time sensitive race to find deities hiding outside our temple/kingdom Luke 17:20-21 which is the starting and finishing point Galatians 4:1.
            Trying to awaken the divine principle in the belly of the fish.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Zeke View Post
              Plus seeing the motifs Galatians 4:24 these stories morphed from dethrones the historical version being some time sensitive race to find deities hiding outside our temple/kingdom Luke 17:20-21 which is the starting and finishing point Galatians 4:1.
              Yes, here we've hashed out some of the Jewish objections to Jesus being THEIR Messiah, as other textual difficulties and controversies exist concerning the 'terms' and 'qualifications' for the Anointed One....while Christianity has developed its own 'Christology' from Jewish sources as well as other influxes channeled by Paul in his concept of a 'celestial Jesus' coming down to engage a 'crucifixion drama' to redeem (in some way) man from 'sin', then dying and being raised again the 3rd day,...'according to the scriptures',...although most Jews have rejected Jesus because they see no way Jesus fulfilling any of the Messianic prophecies (in their scriptures)....as Paul claims as existing (albiet apparently mysteriously or allegorically hidden)

              The whole Messianic question of Jesus is ever conflated/confused by the failure of Jesus to fulfill Jewish expectations of what the Messiah would accomplish and the gospel of Paul which drives converts AWAY from faithful Torah observation for a doctrine of salvation by 'faith' alone (easy believism) as interpreted by some. Paul's gospel brings in besides its Jewish roots, elements of greek philosophy, mystery religion and gnosticism...which deviated so far from the original apostles of Jesus in Jerusalem, yet won the Gentiles over to his gospel, while the Jewish Jesus followers dissipated with the fall of Jerusalem....of which later 'church fathers' would call those original Jesus followers heretics! (being of the Ebionite, Nazarene, some Essene-like factions, and perhaps some early gnostic schools)...all in favor of Paul's gospel.

              We would also note that the gospel narratives could be spun to support aspects of Paul's gospel, since they came along LATER, while the writer of Acts presents Paul in a favorable light as one taken into 'fellowship' with Paul, although the 'tension' between Jesus original apostles (the pillars and community) and Paul is evident elsewhere and further proved by history. Paul took his own 'version' of 'Jesus' and ran with it.
              Last edited by freelight; October 31st, 2017, 06:59 PM.


              sigpic

              Our Real Nature
              freelight's cosmic cafe
              Free-light-Express

              ~*~*~
              Resource Nexus l Theosophical Studies l Esoteric School of Gnostic Wisdom l Sanatana Dharma lAdidaml Facebook l Thread Catalog & History

              Comment

              Working...
              X