-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Evidence that Jesus was the Messiah
- Thread starter jewscout
- Start date
robtex
Veteran Member
That is an interesting question Jewscout for two reasons:
1) We don't know if humanity needs a messiah at all until after the fact
2) We don't know who this messiah will be until after the fact.
Everything before that is predictions and theories. Not that there is anything terrible about that but certainty is not a luxary afforded in this case since the instance is future tense.
1) We don't know if humanity needs a messiah at all until after the fact
2) We don't know who this messiah will be until after the fact.
Everything before that is predictions and theories. Not that there is anything terrible about that but certainty is not a luxary afforded in this case since the instance is future tense.
Scuba Pete
Le plongeur avec attitude...
Rising from the dead was the great giveaway for me. 
However, the New Testament is always referring to the prophecies he fulfilled.
However, the New Testament is always referring to the prophecies he fulfilled.
Green Gaia
Veteran Member
The Jewish people definitely needed a Messiah at the time. They were in great turmoil under Roman rule. Because of their situation they were looking for military leader, and too a lesser extent, a spiritual ones. But when you're in conditions such as the Jews were in the 1 century, spiritual matters take a backseat for most. So, enter Jesus onto the scene. He fit the spiritual leader, but not the military role. So for some he fit the bill, but not all.
robtex
Veteran Member
How do you correlate rising from the dead to saving the world?NetDoc said:Rising from the dead was the great giveaway for me.
However, the New Testament is always referring to the prophecies he fulfilled.
The other prophecies that were fullfiled..which ones specfically have anything to do with the proposed final days? and why?
jewscout
Religious Zionist
Is rising from the dead a requirement of the Moshiach? While Jesus may be a messenger for the Gentiles or even their "messiah" his supposed resurrection is no sign that he is the Moshiach, there are certain criterian set forth in the Torah that must be met.NetDoc said:Rising from the dead was the great giveaway for me.
However, the New Testament is always referring to the prophecies he fulfilled.
Green Gaia
Veteran Member
The Davidic kingdom?jewscout said:At what point haven't the jewish people been in great turmoil
Whether he was going to be a military leader or spiritual, the Messiah was supposed to be human---not part-God, not both God and human at the same time.
Jesus really didn't accomplish the objectives as set out in the Old Testament. Whether that matters or not is up to you, of course, but yeah...
Jesus really didn't accomplish the objectives as set out in the Old Testament. Whether that matters or not is up to you, of course, but yeah...
painted wolf
Grey Muzzle
I think that their reasoning goes something like this...
1) Jesus is the messiah. (they are christian so it stands that this MUST be true)
2) Jesus was a jew
3) if that isn't enough the bible says so.
so therefore Jesus MUST have been the jewish messiah. I mean how can you question such an obvious thing.
wa:do
1) Jesus is the messiah. (they are christian so it stands that this MUST be true)
2) Jesus was a jew
3) if that isn't enough the bible says so.
so therefore Jesus MUST have been the jewish messiah. I mean how can you question such an obvious thing.
wa:do
HelpMe
·´sociopathic meanderer`·
2 Samuel 7:12 - 16-...I will set up thy seed after thee, that shall proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build a house for my name, and I will establish the throne of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my son: if he commit iniquity, I will chasten him with the rod of men, and with the stripes of the children of men; but my lovingkindness shall not depart from him...And thy house and thy kingdom shall be made sure for ever before thee: thy throne shall be established for ever.
how many people remain that can be traced back to david?the man seems to have an eternal kingdom now no?why wasn't he the jewish messiah?
i do suppose you've encountered jewsforjesus right?http://www.jewsforjesus.org/answers/
not that i agree with everything they say, but there are alot of questions you might ask posed there.
how many people remain that can be traced back to david?the man seems to have an eternal kingdom now no?why wasn't he the jewish messiah?
i do suppose you've encountered jewsforjesus right?http://www.jewsforjesus.org/answers/
not that i agree with everything they say, but there are alot of questions you might ask posed there.
HelpMe
·´sociopathic meanderer`·
Matthew's genealogy also breaks with tradition in that he skips names. He traces the line of Joseph, the step-father of Jesus, by going back into history and working toward his own time. He starts tracing the line with Abraham (verse 2) and continues to David (verse 6). Out of David's many sons, Solomon is chosen (verse 6), and the line is then traced to King Jeconiah (verse 11), one of the last kings before the Babylonian captivity. From Jeconiah (verse 12), the line is traced to Joseph (verse 16). Joseph was a direct descendant of David through Solomon, but also through Jeconiah. The "Jeconiah link" is significant in Matthew's genealogy because of the special curse pronounced on Jeconiah in Jeremiah 22:24-30:
According to Matthew's genealogy, Joseph had the blood of Jeconiah in his veins. He was not qualified to sit on David's throne. He was not the heir apparent. This would also mean that no real son of Joseph would have the right to claim the throne of David. Therefore if Jesus were the real son of Joseph, he would have been disqualified from sitting on David's throne. Neither could he claim the right to David's throne by virtue of his adoption by Joseph, since Joseph was not the heir apparent.
The purpose of Matthew's genealogy, then, is to show why Y'shua could not be king if he were really Joseph's son. The purpose was not to show the royal line. For this reason, Matthew starts his Gospel with the genealogy, presents the Jeconiah problem, and then proceeds with the account of the virgin birth which, from Matthew's viewpoint, is the solution to the Jeconiah problem. In summary, Matthew deduces that if Jesus were really Joseph's son, he could not claim to sit on David's throne because of the Jeconiah curse; but Jesus was not Joseph's son, for he was born of the virgin Miriam (Matthew 1:18-25).
http://www.jewsforjesus.org/library/issues/05-06/genealogy.htm
As I live," declares the LORD,
"even though Jeconiah the son of Jehoiakim
king of Judah were a signet ring on my right
hand, yet I would pull you off...
"Is this man Jeconiah a despised, shattered jar?
Or is he an undesirable vessel?
Why have he and his descendants been hurled out
and cast into a land that they had not known?
"O land, land, land, Hear the word of the LORD!!
"Thus says the LORD, 'Write this man [Jeconiah] down childless,
A man who will not prosper in his days;
For no man of his descendants will prosper
Sitting on the throne of David, Or ruling again in Judah.'
No descendant of Jeconiah would have the right to the throne of David. Until Jeremiah, the first requirement for messianic lineage was to be of the house of David. With Jeremiah, it was limited still further. Now one had to be not only of the house of David, but apart from Jeconiah."even though Jeconiah the son of Jehoiakim
king of Judah were a signet ring on my right
hand, yet I would pull you off...
"Is this man Jeconiah a despised, shattered jar?
Or is he an undesirable vessel?
Why have he and his descendants been hurled out
and cast into a land that they had not known?
"O land, land, land, Hear the word of the LORD!!
"Thus says the LORD, 'Write this man [Jeconiah] down childless,
A man who will not prosper in his days;
For no man of his descendants will prosper
Sitting on the throne of David, Or ruling again in Judah.'
According to Matthew's genealogy, Joseph had the blood of Jeconiah in his veins. He was not qualified to sit on David's throne. He was not the heir apparent. This would also mean that no real son of Joseph would have the right to claim the throne of David. Therefore if Jesus were the real son of Joseph, he would have been disqualified from sitting on David's throne. Neither could he claim the right to David's throne by virtue of his adoption by Joseph, since Joseph was not the heir apparent.
The purpose of Matthew's genealogy, then, is to show why Y'shua could not be king if he were really Joseph's son. The purpose was not to show the royal line. For this reason, Matthew starts his Gospel with the genealogy, presents the Jeconiah problem, and then proceeds with the account of the virgin birth which, from Matthew's viewpoint, is the solution to the Jeconiah problem. In summary, Matthew deduces that if Jesus were really Joseph's son, he could not claim to sit on David's throne because of the Jeconiah curse; but Jesus was not Joseph's son, for he was born of the virgin Miriam (Matthew 1:18-25).
http://www.jewsforjesus.org/library/issues/05-06/genealogy.htm
No wonder 'Matthew' made up such silliness. Thank fo sharing. Really.