• 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!

Why did the Jews reject their Messiah when he DID come?

rosends

Well-Known Member
These multiple Messiahs: I read of only two in the OT - Redeemer and King.
Zechariah, among others, shows they are one and the same. But that this
realization will come to the Jews too late. That is, the Jews will see their
King coming to restore Israel and rule in the earth, but He will be the one
who came lowly and riding upon a donkey, and whose hands and feet they
had pierced.
Then you aren't reading what a messiah is. It is a high priest or a king who is anointed with oil. Saul was anointed because he was king. Aaron was anointed because he was a high priest. When Jews talk about a future messiah, we are talking about the return of a king, the next in a line, not some innovation. So if God says Cyrus was his anointed (even without the oil) we say "OK, if you say so, God -- he was just like the many others who were anointed with oil."

And this motion of "redeemer" is not something distinct from king. It is one of the things the king will do -- lead Jews out of exile, redeeming us from among the nations. This is one of the reasons we know he hasn't come yet.
 

wellwisher

Well-Known Member
Satan was in heaven during the old Testament. He was God's left hand man in charge of humans after the fall from paradise. Satan was like God's CEO in charge of the imperfect creation, who reported to God, who was like the chairman of the board. See book of Job. Much of what is attributed to God, by the atheists in the old testament, is really the day to day operations of CEO Satan.

Satan is not exiled from heaven until the book of Revelations, which comes after Jesus. The Messiah of the Old Testament had a connection to Satan, when Satan was God's CEO in charge of mankind.

In Mathew 4:1-10, Jesus goes into the Wilderness to fast and after forty days he is tempted by Satan. Satan is still part of heaven at that time. Among the temptations, Satan promises Jesus all the wealth and kingdoms of the world, if Jesus would bow down and serve him; become the assistant to the CEO. Jesus never denies that Satan had the authority to do this. He just does not accept the offer.

Had Jesus accepted this offer from Satan, who had the authority, Jesus would have become the Messiah that the Jews had anticipated. That Messiah was going to be rich and powerful and the authority and power to conqueror all their enemies.

However, by not accepting the offer to become the Old Messiah, Jesus became something better. When Jesus denied Satan, this undermined Satan's authority, setting in motion a power grab, by Satan, which led to his exile. Jesus becomes the new CEO. Jesus has his own Messiah assistant, who will come in Revelations. He is called faithful and true.
 

PruePhillip

Well-Known Member
Because this isn't part of the prophecies. It's not anywhere. Find the 'he'll die and come back a second time' bit in the Tanakh. Don't worry, I'll wait.

The prophet Zechariah was one of those who saw two Messiahs.
"On that day I will set out to destroy all the nations that attack Jerusalem.
And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem
a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on me, the one they have
pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and
grieve bitterly for him..."


The Messiah - first and second time, not first and second Messiah.
First time he was pierced. David said his hands and feet would be pierced.
Second time he will conquer the nations, but Israel will mourn because
they did not recognize him when they pierced him.
 

Spartan

Well-Known Member
Because this isn't part of the prophecies. It's not anywhere. Find the 'he'll die and come back a second time' bit in the Tanakh. Don't worry, I'll wait.

Yawn...

The below is referring to Isaiah 53, considered Messianic by numerous rabbis of old:

"But something miraculous happens: The servant is alive—he is resurrected. He “sees offspring” and “prolongs days,” both of which can only happen in life (e.g., Gen 48:11; Isa 61:9; Exod 20:12; Deut 4:40; 5:16; 17:20; 25:15; Josh 24:31; Judg 2:7; Prov 3:1–2). Isaiah 53:11 further implies resurrection: “He will see light” (compare Isa 9:6; Psa 36:10; 49:20; Job 3:16; 33:28), and “he will be satisfied in his knowledge.”

“Because the servant exposed his life to death” and was resurrected, he is able to “carry the sin of many and continue to intercede for transgressors” (Isaiah 53:12). It is because of the servant’s death and resurrection that God’s relationship with Israel, and with all people, is restored.

Over 500 years before Jesus, there was a prophecy that an innocent servant would suffer and die for the sins of others—but also be raised to life again."

The Passage That Predicted the Resurrection 500 Years Before It Happened - LogosTalk

Also, PruPhillip gutted your failed proposition in the previous post.
 

Flankerl

Well-Known Member
All those Jews who believed that Jesus was the Messiah didn't buy that Cyrus thing.

You are making a great case for those who say that only the illiterate and apostates followed Jesus movement, or how one would say "were led astray".

God was pretty clear on Cyrus.
Unless of course these Jews disagreed with God, another great case for them being bad Jews.

"Am the same who says of Cyrus, “He is My shepherd; He shall fulfill all My purposes! He shall say of Jerusalem, ‘She shall be rebuilt,’ And to the Temple: ‘You shall be founded again.’”
Thus said the LORD to Cyrus, His anointed one— Whose right hand He has grasped, Treading down nations before him, Ungirding the loins of kings, Opening doors before him And letting no gate stay shut:"

etc etc


Nor did Daniel, Hezekiah, Malachi, Ezekiel etc..

Daniel, Hezekiah, Malachi, Ezekiel etc disagreed with God in Isaiah?


And, unlike the Jewish Messiah King who would reign forever, Cyrus died.

No he won't.


Ha. He may have been "an" anointed one, but he's not "THE" anointed Messiah.

Skeptics of Christianity continue to point to "unfulfilled" Messianic prophecies as proof Jesus is not the Jewish Messiah (they ignore the part where Jesus will return at the end times to fulfill the remaining prophecies). But somehow these same pundits are remarkably silent about Cyrus not fulfilling the exact same prophecies they refer to when bashing Jesus.

It's always sad how Christians don't read the book they hold so dear.
 

rosends

Well-Known Member
An interesting read if one wants to see all the arguments about the focus of certain Tanach prophecies, and responses to them. Those with advanced degrees in the subject have no doubt already read this ;)
Isaiah 52:13
 

sooda

Veteran Member
The prophet Zechariah was one of those who saw two Messiahs.
"On that day I will set out to destroy all the nations that attack Jerusalem.
And I will pour out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem
a spirit of grace and supplication. They will look on me, the one they have
pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an only child, and
grieve bitterly for him..."


The Messiah - first and second time, not first and second Messiah.
First time he was pierced. David said his hands and feet would be pierced.
Second time he will conquer the nations, but Israel will mourn because
they did not recognize him when they pierced him.

Zachariah was prophesying Cyrus who was an anointed king and deliverer. Look at how long Zachariah lived.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
The reality is that there were many "messiahs" mentioned in the Tanakh, as they were "anointed" by God according to the texts.
An interesting read if one wants to see all the arguments about the focus of certain Tanach prophecies, and responses to them. Those with advanced degrees in the subject have no doubt already read this ;)
Isaiah 52:13
But then there's the question as to whether such prophecies were accurate to begin with?

Sorry for the stink-bomb. :D
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
Isaiah is talking about Israel not Jesus.
And it begs the question as to whether it was even a prophecy to begin with or whether it was a "flashback" designed after the fact. If my memory is correct (even a dubious question, btw), Isaiah had a later writing than the events mentioned. I don't have time to look it up right now-- lunch is on (huevos rancheros), thus a far higher priority!
 

PruePhillip

Well-Known Member
Zachariah was prophesying Cyrus who was an anointed king and deliverer. Look at how long Zachariah lived.

So... the Jews are going to mourn because they killed Cyrus?
And Cyrus is going to destroy all the nations that attack Israel?
Uh... one of these nations, according to Ezekiel, will be Persia.

You might be right, who can tell, but you need to do an awful
amount of explaining.
 

PruePhillip

Well-Known Member
Isaiah is talking about Israel not Jesus.

Yeah, this smacks of "explaining away" something. In this case it's explaining away
two thousand years of Jewish exile. Jesus spoke about the calamity that will come
upon the Jews - they did not know the time of their visitation.
And of course, I fail to see how the suffering of the Jews redeemed the Gentiles
who were busy killing them.
 

sooda

Veteran Member
So... the Jews are going to mourn because they killed Cyrus?
And Cyrus is going to destroy all the nations that attack Israel?
Uh... one of these nations, according to Ezekiel, will be Persia.

You might be right, who can tell, but you need to do an awful
amount of explaining.

“Thus says the Lord to his anointed (Messiah), to Cyrus, whose right hand I have grasped, to subdue nations before him and to loose the belts of kings…” (Isaiah 45:1) As the Bible records it:

This explains it perfectly. I am really surprised you didn't know this. The problem is that Jesus wasn't "enough" .. Christians felt they had to embellish Jesus. IMO they made a mistake.

King Cyrus the Great was a non-Jewish Messiah | Allen S ...
King Cyrus the Great was a non-Jewish Messiah

Mar 09, 2018 · King Cyrus the Great was a non-Jewish Messiah. “Thus says the Lord to his anointed (Messiah), to Cyrus, whose right hand I have grasped, to subdue nations before him and to loose the belts of kings…” (Isaiah 45:1) As the Bible records it: “In the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, that the word of the Lord by the mouth...



 

sooda

Veteran Member
Yeah, this smacks of "explaining away" something. In this case it's explaining away
two thousand years of Jewish exile. Jesus spoke about the calamity that will come
upon the Jews - they did not know the time of their visitation.
And of course, I fail to see how the suffering of the Jews redeemed the Gentiles
who were busy killing them.


Most Jews were living in exile hundreds of years before the birth of Christ.

Who says Jewish suffering redeemed the Gentiles?
 

PruePhillip

Well-Known Member
Most Jews were living in exile hundreds of years before the birth of Christ.

Who says Jewish suffering redeemed the Gentiles?

Isaiah 53 does. It says
"... he was pierced for our transgressions,
he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was on him,
and by his wounds we are healed. "

Odd, I thought Isaiah himself was a Jew. Anyhow,
that's what you are saying. And even more amazing,
the dead Jews look down upon the earth and are
satisfied that their suffering and death has redeemed
the earth. Sounds strange to me.
 

sooda

Veteran Member
Isaiah 53 does. It says
"... he was pierced for our transgressions,
he was crushed for our iniquities;
the punishment that brought us peace was on him,
and by his wounds we are healed. "

Odd, I thought Isaiah himself was a Jew. Anyhow,
that's what you are saying. And even more amazing,
the dead Jews look down upon the earth and are
satisfied that their suffering and death has redeemed
the earth. Sounds strange to me.


Isaiah 53 is about Israel.. Read the whole of Isaiah for context.

Israel is the suffering servant , despised of men.
 

Spartan

Well-Known Member
Isaiah 53 is about Israel.. Read the whole of Isaiah for context.

Not in a million years.

Here's why Israel cannot possibly be the "Suffering Servant" of Isaiah chapter 53:

1. The servant of Isaiah 53 is an innocent and guiltless sufferer. Israel is never described as sinless. Isaiah 1:4 says of the nation: "Alas sinful nation, a people laden with iniquity. A brood of evildoers, children who are corrupters!" He then goes on in the same chapter to characterize Judah as Sodom, Jerusalem as a harlot, and the people as those whose hands are stained with blood (verses 10, 15, and 21). What a far cry from the innocent and guiltless sufferer of Isaiah 53 who had "done no violence, nor was any deceit in his mouth!"

2. The prophet said: "It pleased the LORD to bruise him." Has the awful treatment of the Jewish people (so contrary, by the way, to the teaching of Jesus to love everyone) really been God's pleasure, as is said of the suffering of the servant in Isaiah 53:10 ? If, as some rabbis contend, Isaiah 53 refers to the holocaust, can we really say of Israel's suffering during that horrible period, "It pleased the LORD to bruise him?" Yet it makes perfect sense to say that God was pleased to have Messiah suffer and die as our sin offering to provide us forgiveness and atonement.

3. The person mentioned in this passage suffers silently and willingly. Yet all people, even Israelites, complain when they suffer! Brave Jewish men and women fought in resistance movements against Hitler. Remember the Vilna Ghetto Uprising? Remember the Jewish men who fought on the side of the allies? Can we really say Jewish suffering during the holocaust and during the preceding centuries was done silently and willingly?

4. The figure described in Isaiah 53 suffers, dies, and rises again to atone for his people's sins. The Hebrew word used in Isaiah 53:10 for "sin-offering" is "asham," which is a technical term meaning "sin-offering." See how it is used in Leviticus chapters 5 and 6. Isaiah 53 describes a sinless and perfect sacrificial lamb who takes upon himself the sins of others so that they might be forgiven. Can anyone really claim that the terrible suffering of the Jewish people, however undeserved and unjust, atones for the sins of the world? Whoever Isaiah 53 speaks of, the figure described suffers and dies in order to provide a legal payment for sin so that others can be forgiven. This cannot be true of the Jewish people as a whole, or of any other mere human.

5. It is the prophet who is speaking in this passage. He says: "who has believed our message." The term "message" usually refers to the prophetic message, as it does in Jeremiah 49:14. Also, when we understand the Hebrew parallelism of verse 1, we see "Who has believed our message" as parallel to "to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed." The "arm of the Lord" refers to God's powerful act of salvation. So the message of the speaker is the message of a prophet declaring what God has done to save his people.

6. The prophet speaking is Isaiah himself, who says the sufferer was punished for "the transgression of my people," according to verse 8. Who are the people of Isaiah? Israel. So the sufferer of Isaiah 53suffered for Israel. So how could he be Israel? (website no longer exists)
 

Flankerl

Well-Known Member
So... the Jews are going to mourn because they killed Cyrus?

And exactly when and where have we mourned that "we" killed some bloke who was named Jesus after his death?

We mostly mourned when Christians had another holiday, before/during/after which they went out to kill a few of us.
Sometimes less, sometimes more, really depended on luck.

Sometimes the local rulers decided to confiscate all our belongings after they had raped and murdered us after which they send us away.
On to the next county/duchy/kingdom where the cycle repeated itself.


But then again you probably believe that the Roman Empire, which would a few years later massacre its way through Judea, killing hundreds of thousands up to a few million Jews in the process, was in any way scared of the Jews and so sentenced someone to death they knew was innocent.
Funny how this supposed blood lust of the Jews directly feeds into the various reasons your people murdered, raped and pillaged our people for for over a millennia.

The scared Roman Empire. The same Empire which killed over a million Celts in Gaul and enslaved hundreds of thousands.
The same Empire which completely levelled Carthage and salted the earth so that no one shall rebuild and live in it again.
The same Empire which had conquered almost the entire Mediterranean at this point in time and whose only adversary left were the Persians.

Yeah I bet they were pretty scared of the evil Jews.
 
Top