• 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!

Jesus a Messiah?

jade0887

Member
I don't believe Jesus was the Messiah or that there will ever be one. If you disagree, then, let's talk, debate, or a little of both.
Jamie
 

Scuba Pete

Le plongeur avec attitude...
Welcome Jade!

I do believe he was the Christos, the Messiah and am glad he came when he did! :D
 

jade0887

Member
How do you explain Gen. 49:10, the verse that states that the sceptre of leadership will remain with the tribe of Judah until Shiloh or, as most Christians view it, Jesus comes? Now, here's my problem with that: Jesus is of the tribe of Judah and can't take the sceptre away from his own tribe. Any comments?
 

Gilbert1908

New Member
How do you explain Gen. 49:10, the verse that states that the sceptre of leadership will remain with the tribe of Judah until Shiloh or, as most Christians view it, Jesus comes? Now, here's my problem with that: Jesus is of the tribe of Judah and can't take the sceptre away from his own tribe. Any comment

The main comment is simply that the best arguments for Jesus as the messiah are not found in the Old Testament, but in the New Testament.
 

jade0887

Member
Gilbert,
How does that answer my Gen. 49:10 problem with Jesus' messiahship? I have additional comments on the other aspects associated with Jesus' messiahship that you alluded to but, first things first.
Jamie
 

Scott1

Well-Known Member
Hiya jade, welcome to RF!

You have confused me.... this passage clearly points to Jesus as Messiah..... I don't see the point you are trying to make.

Genesis 49


10 The scepter will not depart from Judah,

nor the ruler's staff from between his feet,

until he comes to whom it belongs and the obedience of the nations is his. (NIV)


While tribute is brought to him: this translation is based on a slight change in the Hebrew text which, as it stands would seem to mean, "until he comes to Shiloh." A somewhat different reading of the Hebrew text would be, "until he comes to whom it belongs." This last has been traditionally understood in a Messianic sense. In any case, the passage foretells the supremacy of the tribe of Judah, which found its fullfillment in the Davidic dynasty and unlimately in the Messianic Son of David, Jesus Christ.

Peace,
Scott
 

jade0887

Member
It does take awhile to see this. Let me try to simplify: A. Sceptre departs from the tribe of Judah when Shiloh comes; 2. Jesus is part of the tribe of Judah; 3. If Jesus is Shiloh and of the tribe of Judah, then, his coming would remove the sceptre from Judah and himself; 4. The only solution is to say that Shiloh is not of the tribe of Judah and thereby cannot be either Jesus or the long-awaited Davidic messiah.
Jamie
 

Scott1

Well-Known Member
Oh.... ok.... I get ya now.

Funny how the rest of the Christian world missed this for 2,000 years.... :rolleyes:

Thanks for your opinion.

Scott
 

jade0887

Member
Why is it funny? One would think that common sense is common sense. Why the entire Christian world missed it is not my concern. Also, no matter how it's translated Gen. 49:10 still involved the departure of the sceptre from the tribe of Judah when Shiloh comes. Again, why is logic funny?
Jamie
 

Scuba Pete

Le plongeur avec attitude...
I don't follow your reasoning. It doesn't say that the last person to get the sceptre HAS to be OUT of the tribe of Judah... just that it won't leave. I am not sure I would base my entire theology on a semantical twist.
 

jade0887

Member
Netdoc,
Welcome, back! Obviously, that topic has been exhausted, though I don't look at it as a semantic twist. Let's move on anyway. What's your view of the fact that "virgin" is a mistranslation and should've been rendered "young woman" not "virgin" in Isaiah 7:14. Doesn't the fact that there was a Hebrew word for "virgin" mean that the "young woman" wasn't a virgin? Also, this was a sign to a king that died 400 years before Christ came. How can it's fulfillment 400 years after that king's death be a sign to that king?
Jamie:)
 

Scuba Pete

Le plongeur avec attitude...
Hmnnnn... the virgin birth, while it appeals to me is not a make or break deal for my belief. I am sure that there are lots of misunderstandings that have no real impact on whether Jesus was the Messiah or not.
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
Perhaps more serious (since Isaiah most probably was referring to a virgin) is that it exposes a tendency on the part of the author of gMat to screw up in his zealousness to reverse engineer a prophecy. He comes off looking anything but inspired.
 

Scuba Pete

Le plongeur avec attitude...
Those were funny! I read them all and did not see ONE VALID POINT in any of them. Every single one was intellectually and scripturally dishonest. It's a shame that someone went to such great length as to post drivel on the net. Go figure.

Why don't you pick the "strongest" point made and lets discuss it.
 
Top