User Tag List

Page 11 of 11 FirstFirst ... 891011
Results 151 to 156 of 156

Thread: JC was NOT the messiah!

  1. #151
    TOL Legend Jacob's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Tacoma, Washington
    Posts
    10,121
    Thanks
    46
    Thanked 457 Times in 430 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    76417
    Quote 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
    John 1:40-41 NASB, John 1:49 NASB - 40 One of the two who heard John speak and followed Him, was Andrew, Simon Peter's brother. 41 He found first his own brother Simon and said to him, "We have found the Messiah" (which translated means Christ). 49 - Nathanael answered Him, "Rabbi, You are the Son of God; You are the King of Israel."

  2. #152
    Eclectic Theosophist freelight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Bend, OR. USA
    Posts
    7,064
    Thanks
    2,520
    Thanked 1,615 Times in 1,144 Posts

    Blog Entries
    80
    Mentioned
    65 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    1476270

    Red face Doctoring scripture..................

    Quote 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.

  3. #153
    Over 4000 post club Nihilo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    The North & the West
    Posts
    4,857
    Thanks
    666
    Thanked 1,148 Times in 934 Posts

    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    249919
    Quote 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.
    THE LORD JESUS CHRIST IS RISEN. Matthew 28:6 (KJV) Mark 16:6 (KJV) Luke 24:6 (KJV)

    Romans 10:9 (KJV) 1st Corinthians 15:14 (KJV)

    Trevor: "I know how to drive, man."
    Ricky: "You also know how to be stupid."

  4. #154
    Eclectic Theosophist freelight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Bend, OR. USA
    Posts
    7,064
    Thanks
    2,520
    Thanked 1,615 Times in 1,144 Posts

    Blog Entries
    80
    Mentioned
    65 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    1476270
    Quote 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.

  5. #155
    Over 2000 post club Zeke's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Posts
    2,110
    Thanks
    123
    Thanked 312 Times in 284 Posts

    Blog Entries
    2
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    134413
    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.

  6. #156
    Eclectic Theosophist freelight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Bend, OR. USA
    Posts
    7,064
    Thanks
    2,520
    Thanked 1,615 Times in 1,144 Posts

    Blog Entries
    80
    Mentioned
    65 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    1476270
    Quote 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.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us