Messianic Christology

[Tumah]

. 5 Behold, the days come, saith Jehovah, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and he shall reign as king and deal wisely, and shall execute justice and righteousness in the land. 6 In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely; and this is his name whereby he shall be called: Jehovah our righteousness.
Jeremiah 23:5-6

This passage teaches

Messiah would be a God Man.

The Messiah would be Jehovah Himself; Jehovah would become a man.

Messiah would be a descendant of David and therefore king. Jeremiah here reaffirms the Davidic Covenant (discussed under I Chronicles 17:10b - 14).

This verse is properly translated as "and this is the name which he will be called "Jehovah is our Righteousness". The second word is part of his name.
It is not saying that the Messiah is G-d. It is saying that people will call him "Jehovah is Our Righteousness". Like Jeremiah means "Jehovah Raises Up".

This verse does not prove that the Messiah is G-d.

. 2 But thou, Beth-lehem Ephrathah, which art little to be among the thousands of Judah, out of thee shall one come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth are from of old, from everlasting.
Micah 5:2

This verse teaches that

Messiah would be born in Bethlehem the city of David.

Messiah would be divine as well as human, having existing from eternity past.

This verse is referring to the fact that Jesse, David's father was from Bethlehem and the Messiah is a descendant of Jesse through David.
Although you did finally find a Messianic prophecy.

9 Rejoice greatly, O daughter of Zion; shout, O daughter of Jerusalem: behold, thy king cometh unto thee; he is just, and having salvation; lowly, and riding upon an ***, even upon a colt the foal of an ***. 10 And I will cut off the chariot from Ephraim, and the horse from Jerusalem; and the battle bow shall be cut off; and he shall speak peace unto the nations: and his dominion shall be from sea to sea, and from the River to the ends of the earth.
Zachariah 9:9-10

This passage teaches that

Messiah's first coming would be in humility.

Messiah's official presentation as the Messianic King would come when He rides into Jerusalem, riding on the foal of a donkey.

Two messianic prophecies in a row!
It doesn't seem to be saying that this is his first presentation or that it will be when he rides into Jerusalem on a donkey. It says that the messiah will be riding on a donkey. And it says that G-d will cut of the horses from Jerusalem.

1 Open thy doors, O Lebanon, that the fire may devour thy cedars. 2 Wail, O fir-tree, for the cedar is fallen, because the goodly ones are destroyed: wail, O ye oaks of Bashan, for the strong forest is come down. 3 A voice of the wailing of the shepherds! for their glory is destroyed: a voice of the roaring of young lions! for the pride of the Jordan is laid waste. 4 Thus said Jehovah my God: Feed the flock of slaughter; 5 whose possessors slay them, and hold themselves not guilty; and they that sell them say, Blessed be Jehovah, for I am rich; and their own shepherds pity them not. 6 For I will no more pity the inhabitants of the land, saith Jehovah; but, lo, I will deliver the men every one into his neighbor’s hand, and into the hand of his king; and they shall smite the land, and out of their hand I will not deliver them. 7 So I fed the flock of slaughter, verily the poor of the flock. And I took unto me two staves; the one I called Beauty, and the other I called Bands; and I fed the flock.
Zachariah 11:1-7

This passage teaches that

Messiah's first coming would be rejected, especially by the Jewish leaders.

While the nation as a whole would reject Messiah there would be a small Remnant of believing people who would accept Him.

The leadership of Israel would sell Him out for thirty pieces of silver.

The results of the rejection would be twofold, first, the protection would be taken away leaving Israel vulnerable to Gentile attack - in AD 70. Second, unity would be removed and Israel would be scattered.

Because they turned away from the true Messiah they would foolishly accept a false messiah. This led to the second devastation of the land in AD 135.

If the destruction described in verses 1-3 were the destruction in AD 70 then the Messiah would have to come before 70 AD.

Messiah is the Good Shepherd Jn 10:11-18

This is unfortunately not a Messianic prophecy. The two staffs are the two kingdoms of Israel and Judah. Jeroboah wanted to lead the nation pleasantly (1 Kings 12:3,4). Rehoboam was the opposite (1 Kings 12:11).

So no.

10 And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplication; and they shall look unto me whom they have pierced; and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his first-born.

Zachariah 12:10

This verse teaches

Messiah's first coming would be rejected by Israel.

Messiah would die a violent death by means of piercing.

Messiah would be both God and man.

I'm not sure if you realized how the verse changes from first person to third person:
"And they shall look to me, which have been pierced, and they shall mourn him as one mourns..."
If G-d was the one being pierced, then the verses should have said:
"And they shall look to me...and they shall mourn me..."
Since it doesn't, we can say that the verse seems to be speaking about two different entities.

 

[Tumah]

Forgive me. But I am told that there is a law in Hebrew grammar, something to do with the "first mention" I only heard this a couple times (not enough to sink in) but it had to do with Isaiah's virgin will conceive passage. Since there is no virgin mentioned in Isaiah in the immediate context of his book, I'm told that the reader goes to the nearest first mentioned virgin or more clearly a woman who's giving birth will be miraculous and will be a sign. I suppose you could argue for Sarah as being a miracle too. But I am pointing at Eve who's seed would crush the evil one.

My evidence is based on the biblical Jewish reckoning after the father and not the mother. Yet Moses records that this son would be reckoned after the woman and not the man. There is no explanation for this until Isaiah gives his prophecies including the Branch of Jehovah, the Servant of Jehovah named Emmanuel.

In a sentence (or verse) where the subject is not identified, then we go back to a previously mentioned subject. So if it says "he" without saying who "he" is, we will look back to the previously mentioned male. This is in all languages:
John went to the park.
He had fun.
We don't need to do that in the verse in Isaiah, because the word "הנה" means "here" as in Gen. 22 "And Abraham said 'here I am (הנני)'" So the young lady was probably with them. The word is commonly translated as "Behold", even though it has nothing to do with seeing, because it also means exclamation. Like you might say, "Here, look what I have! You mean, look what I have here, but the here is in exclamation.
So the verse is saying, "Here! The young woman is already pregnant and she shall bear a son..."

 

[Tumah]

Isaiah did not preach peace, he preached judgement his commission is found here:

“And he said, Go, and tell this people, Hear ye indeed, but understand not; and see ye indeed, but perceive not. Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and turn again, and be healed. Then said I, Lord, how long? And he answered, Until cities be waste without inhabitant, and houses without man, and the land become utterly waste, and Jehovah have removed men far away, and the forsaken places be many in the midst of the land. And if there be yet a tenth in it, it also shall in turn be eaten up: as a terebinth, and as an oak, whose stock remaineth, when they are felled; so the holy seed is the stock thereof.”
‭‭Isaiah‬ ‭6:9-13‬ ‭ASV‬‬
http://bible.com/12/isa.6.9-13.asv

I have no idea what you're talking about.
He preached whatever he was told to say.
That's what prophets do.

 

[Tumah]

I'm told that in Hebrew there is a differentiation of terms for "you" and it is used by Isaiah who switches from the sign to you Ahaz to the sign to "you all" to Israel the nation.

You'll have to quote the verses you're talking about, because I'm not sure if you're talking about singular/plural or something else.

 

[Intojoy]

In a sentence (or verse) where the subject is not identified, then we go back to a previously mentioned subject. So if it says "he" without saying who "he" is, we will look back to the previously mentioned male. This is in all languages:
John went to the park.
He had fun.
We don't need to do that in the verse in Isaiah, because the word "הנה" means "here" as in Gen. 22 "And Abraham said 'here I am (הנני)'" So the young lady was probably with them. The word is commonly translated as "Behold", even though it has nothing to do with seeing, because it also means exclamation. Like you might say, "Here, look what I have! You mean, look what I have here, but the here is in exclamation.
So the verse is saying, "Here! The young woman is already pregnant and she shall bear a son..."

Thank you for that. But where is the pregnant woman? Isaiah is with Shearushuv his son. Dr Fruchtenbaum of Ariel ministries says it goes back to Gen 3.

 

[Intojoy]

You'll have to quote the verses you're talking about, because I'm not sure if you're talking about singular/plural or something else.

“And he said, Hear ye now, O house of David: Is it a small thing for you to weary men, that ye will weary my God also? Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign: behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.”
‭‭Isaiah‬ ‭7:13-14‬ ‭ASV‬‬
http://bible.com/12/isa.7.13-14.asv

Isaiah switches to the plural you here. I'm told.

 

[Intojoy]

A very interesting teaching from Fruchtenbaum is the Mathew 12 passage where Yeshua condemns the generation of Jews (first century only! Not all generations) of his day for committing the unpardonable sin. Nearly 99% of christiandom have resorted to guesswork on this. The evidence of a lack of Jewish scholarship.

Anyways, to keep it short, Frucht says that in first century Pharisaic Judaism there were certain miracles that the elders taught only Messiah could perform when he comes. In Mt 12 is one of the three messianic miracles, the casting out of a dumb demon.

The Pharisees brought this demoniac to Yeshua as a test case. The response of the people was they questioned "is not this the Son of David". Frucht points out that the elders claim that Yeshua is able to do this miracle only because of Satan and not because he is Messiah. Thus the unpardonable sin is the national rejection of the Messiahship of Yeshua by Israel while he was present, on the basis of demon possession. Frucht points out this judgement is for that generation only, the judgment of the withdrawal of the offer of the kingdom which shall be given to a future generation. And then he points to Hosea 5:15 claiming Yeshua returned to his place in heaven until the nation of Israel confessed their sin.

I realize this is offensive to Jewish people since the name Yeshua has been used to persecute Jews for centuries. But even if you don't believe that the gospels are authentic to the God of Israel at least you can appreciate an interpretation of the writings from a Hebrew scholar like Dr Fruchtenbaum.

Sorry for the long posts.

 

[Intojoy]

“

And he said, Hear YOU ALL now, O house of David: Is it a small thing for YOU ALL to weary men, that YOU ALL will weary my God also? Therefore the Lord himself will give YOU ALL a sign: behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel.”
‭‭Isaiah‬ ‭7:13-14‬ ‭ASV‬‬
http://bible.com/12/isa.7.13-14.asv

Isaiah switches to the plural you here. I'm told.

Isaiah uses the Hebrew plural here because there are two separate signs. One to "you" Ahaz and one to "you all" to Israel.

 

[Ingledsva]

Tumah did a great job debunking what you wrote, and listed.

You don't seem to understand that you are skimming Jewish texts trying to make YOUR later Christian beliefs fit them.

Even if every Tanakh text you posted was actually about a Messiah (and they aren't!) - it would have to be about the awaited Jewish Messiah, - and Jesus does not fulfill the prophecies.

*

 

[Ingledsva]

Isaiah uses the Hebrew plural here because there are two separate signs. One to "you" Ahaz and one to "you all" to Israel.

Baloney!

It is for Ahaz, Isaiah who is with him, and the aforementioned warriors fighting in that war.

The sign is to show that "God is with them" in this war.

*

 

[Intojoy]

Baloney!

It is for Ahaz, Isaiah who is with him, and the aforementioned warriors fighting in that war.

The sign is to show that "God is with them" in this war.

*

Lol

 

[Ingledsva]

For the Chief Musician; set to Aijaleth hash-Shahar. A Psalm of David.

1 My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?
Why art thou so far from helping me, and from the words of my groaning?
2 O my God, I cry in the daytime, but thou answerest not;
And in the night season, and am not silent.
3 But thou art holy,
O thou that inhabitest the praises of Israel.
...

Psalm 22

This passage teaches that

In extreme agony Messiah would cry out for God's help.

Messiah would be a despised and rejected individual.

The Messiah's bones would all be pulled out of joint.

The Messiah's heart would rupture.

Messiah would suffer an extreme degree of thirst.

Messiah's hands and feet would be pierced.

Messiah's clothing would be divided by casting of lots.

At the point of death Messiah's trust would be in God the Father.

Messiah would be resurrected.

Psalms is not about Jesus. He did not - and does not - exist in any messianic role for the Jews.

It does not say - pierced my hands and feet. That is mistranslation bull.

13 They gape upon me with their mouth,
As a ravening and a roaring lion.
14 I am poured out like water,
And all my bones are out of joint:
My heart is like wax;
It is melted within me.
15 My strength is dried up like a potsherd;
And my tongue cleaveth to my jaws;
And thou hast brought me into the dust of death.
16 For dogs have compassed me:
A company of evil-doers have inclosed me;
They pierced my hands and my feet.

*
"The Psalm describes the angst of the psalmist (I think David) who is surrounded by enemies and asks why G-d has forsaken him. Psalms 22:16, which in Hebrew says "k'ari b'yadai v'raglai" ("Like a lion (the enemies) are at my hands and feet"). The disputed word here is "k'ari" which is spelled kaph - aleph - resh - yud. Most graduates of a Hebrew school education know that an ari is a lion, and that the use of the letter "kaph" before a word means "like" or "as."

http://judaism.about.com/od/jewishviewofjesus/a/jesus_psalms.htm

*

 

[Ingledsva]

4 Who hath ascended up into heaven, and descended?
Who hath gathered the wind in his fists?
Who hath bound the waters in his garment?
Who hath established all the ends of the earth?
What is his name, and what is his son’s name, if thou knowest?

Proverbs 30:4

This verse teaches

Messiah would be uniquely the Son of God.

NO IT DOESN'T!

This is about YHVH! And the fact that no man has done these things. In other words it is saying name a man, or his son, who has done these things. None but God can do them.

Pro 30:1 The words of Agur the son of Jakeh, even the prophecy: the man spake unto Ithiel, even unto Ithiel and Ucal,

Pro 30:2 Surely I am more brutish than any man, and have not the understanding of a man.

Pro 30:3 I neither learned wisdom, nor have the knowledge of the holy.

Pro 30:4 Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended? who hath gathered the wind in his fists? who hath bound the waters in a garment? who hath established all the ends of the earth? what is his name, and what is his son's name, if thou canst, tell?

Pro 30:5 Every word of Eloahh is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.

*

 

[Intojoy]

“For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.”
‭‭Isaiah‬ ‭9:6‬ ‭ASV‬‬
http://bible.com/12/isa.9.6.asv

 

[Ingledsva]

“For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given; and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, Mighty God, Everlasting Father, Prince of Peace.”
‭‭Isaiah‬ ‭9:6‬ ‭ASV‬‬
http://bible.com/12/isa.9.6.asv

Christian mistranslations again - trying to make Jewish verses fit a later Christian idea.

Isa 9:5 For every battle of the warrior is with confused noise, and garments rolled in blood; but this shall be with burning and fuel of fire.

Isaiah 9:6 For is born a child, a son given to take the rule/government upon his shoulders; and his name is called Wonderful Adviser, Mighty Warrior, Father of future generations, Ruler/keeper/prince of peace.

Isaiah 9:7 To increase the government/empire and the welfare/safety/peace of the throne of David, and over his kingdom, to strengthen the justice and righteousness, from this time, and to eternity. Zealously YHVH of Hosts will do this.

Note that he is still recording and this is present tense - Things are going to be different this time - FOR - this son has been BORN.

*
And - IT AGAIN - continues on talking about what it is actually about - this war.

Isa 9:11 Therefore the LORD shall set up the adversaries of Rezin against him, and join his enemies together;

Isa 9:12The Syrians before, and the Philistines behind; and they shall devour Israel with open mouth.

Edit - Forgot to add - I did say I studied this stuff, and kept all of the research. It just takes time for me to find the pertinent information.

I noted you made a reference to - The Branch, - again associating him with Jesus.

Somewhere I have the verses NAMING - The Branch - and it isn't Jesus. I will post that as soon as I find it - after dinner.


*

 

[buddhist]

OP, you'll also need to prove the following:

1. That an eternal, immanent deity wrote those words (to prove the source);
2. That those words were recorded accurately by the purported authors (to prove authenticity and authority);
3. That those words were preserved and transmitted accurately down through time (to prove accuracy);
4. That those words were dated accurately (to prove the relationship between prophecy and answer); and,
5. That those words were translated accurately.

Do you have personal knowledge of those 5, and if so, could you please share? Thank you.

 

[Ingledsva]

. 5 Behold, the days come, saith Jehovah, that I will raise unto David a righteous Branch, and he shall reign as king and deal wisely, and shall execute justice and righteousness in the land. 6 In his days Judah shall be saved, and Israel shall dwell safely; and this is his name whereby he shall be called: Jehovah our righteousness.
Jeremiah 23:5-6

This passage teaches

Messiah would be a God Man.

The Messiah would be Jehovah Himself; Jehovah would become a man.

Messiah would be a descendant of David and therefore king. Jeremiah here reaffirms the Davidic Covenant (discussed under I Chronicles 17:10b - 14).

It doesn't teach a single thing you are saying!

Zec 6:11 Then take silver and gold, and make crowns, and set them upon the head of Joshua the son of Josedech, the high priest;

Zec 6:12 And speak unto him, saying, Thus speaketh the LORD of hosts, saying, Behold the man whose name is The BRANCH; and he shall grow up out of his place, and he shall build the temple of the LORD:

That BRANCH - JOSHUA son of Josedech.


Zec 6:13 Even he shall build the temple of the LORD; and he shall bear the glory, and shall sit and rule upon his throne; and he shall be a priest upon his throne: and the counsel of peace shall be between them both.

Zec 6:14 And the crowns shall be to Helem, and to Tobijah, and to Jedaiah, and to Hen the son of Zephaniah, for a memorial in the temple of the LORD.

Zec 7:1 And it came to pass in the fourth year of king Darius, that the word of the LORD came unto Zechariah in the fourth day of the ninth month, even in Chisleu;

*

 

[Intojoy]

Baloney!

It is for Ahaz, Isaiah who is with him, and the aforementioned warriors fighting in that war.

The sign is to show that "God is with them" in this war.

*

I understand your arguments but the Hebrew plural "you" is used. That's not even debatable.

The sign of the virgin birth goes back to what the hearers would have plainly understood - Gen 3:15.

The singular you is changed to the plural you at that point of Isaiah's dialogue with Ahaz. The reason Ahaz received aid was due to the Davidic Covenant and not because Ahaz was a godly King, he was an idolator.

You're arguments are based in your pre conceived philosophical prejudice and betokens unworthy scholarship as evidenced in the willful ignorance concerning the Hebrew plural you.

 

[Intojoy]

NO IT DOESN'T!

This is about YHVH! And the fact that no man has done these things. In other words it is saying name a man, or his son, who has done these things. None but God can do them.

Pro 30:1 The words of Agur the son of Jakeh, even the prophecy: the man spake unto Ithiel, even unto Ithiel and Ucal,

Pro 30:2 Surely I am more brutish than any man, and have not the understanding of a man.

Pro 30:3 I neither learned wisdom, nor have the knowledge of the holy.

Pro 30:4 Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended? who hath gathered the wind in his fists? who hath bound the waters in a garment? who hath established all the ends of the earth? what is his name, and what is his son's name, if thou canst, tell?

Pro 30:5 Every word of Eloahh is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.

*

His Son's name is Yeshua

 

[Intojoy]

OP, you'll also need to prove the following:

1. That an eternal, immanent deity wrote those words (to prove the source);
2. That those words were recorded accurately by the purported authors (to prove authenticity and authority);
3. That those words were preserved and transmitted accurately down through time (to prove accuracy);
4. That those words were dated accurately (to prove the relationship between prophecy and answer); and,
5. That those words were translated accurately.

Do you have personal knowledge of those 5, and if so, could you please share? Thank you.

If you really don't believe in the divine origin of scripture, where has it been changed?

Furthermore buddahead, how is it that the bible has not changed in the last 5-600 years? I don't think it's changed ever. But just to humor you a bit and to take your reasoning to its logical conclusion, just where in the last 1000 years has there been a bungling as buddah's words have been bungled since 600 BC?