Evidence that Jesus was the Messiah

[TrueBeliever37]

Because it has nothing to do with a messiah. At least not "the" messiah".

It is kind of hard to discuss, if you don't explain what you think it is referring to.

In the Hebrew I have looked at it calls him the Moshiach, and the most Holy. Who do you believe it is referring to?

Do you believe it is referring to the Messiah in the scriptures where it refers to The Branch?

 

[TrueBeliever37]

The prophesies are vague, probably deliberately so there fulfillment wouldn’t be held to a narrow margin of interpretation. So to answer your question, maybe yes, maybe no. I hope I cleared that up for you, LOL.

Your answer didn't really help. I had 3 questions in post 236, and was hoping someone of the Jewish faith would answer them from their perspective.

 

[Tumah]

It is kind of hard to discuss, if you don't explain what you think it is referring to.

In the Hebrew I have looked at it calls him the Moshiach, and the most Holy. Who do you believe it is referring to?

Do you believe it is referring to the Messiah in the scriptures where it refers to The Branch?

The word "moshiach" just means "someone who is anointed". There are a number of people who are are anointed - and that's assuming it means someone who has literally been anointed.
It doesn't say, "most holy", it says "holy of holies", the name for the inner sanctuary of the Temple.

You'll have to specify which "the branch" you're referring to. Isa. 60:21 for instance is calling Israel the branch.

 

[Ben Avraham]

Evidence that Jesus was the Messiah.

There is absolutely no evidence that Jesus was the Messiah. Even if the Messiah could be an individual, Jesus has put together nothing to serve as an evidence that he was the Messiah. Even for Cyrus a Gentile king, Isaiah found a place in his book to welcome him as an Anointed one, though as a Messianic leader for having proclaimed freedom for the Jews and financed the rebuilding of the Temple. (Isaiah 45:1) What did Jesus do to be the Messiah? When he was born, Israel was under the foreign power of Rome, during his life time that power only grew harder and after his death, the Romans destroyed the Temple. Jesus did not classify even as a Messianic leader; let alone the Messiah! An individual could not be the Messiah. An individual is born, lives his span of life and dies. Are we to expect a new Messiah in every generation? Obviously not! Besides, the Messiah is not supposed to die but to remain as a People before the Lord forever. (Jeremiah 31:35-37)

 

[Tumah]

Rabbio,

So in Judaism:

1. Isn't the Messiah supposed to be an individual?

In one respect, yes.

2. Do you believe that there is a resurrection? If not, do you believe in heaven and hell?

Yes, yes and yes.

3. If the fulfillment of the promise to David that of his seed he would always have a man to sit on the throne, was first fulfilled by Solomon, then who is on the throne now?

The promise to David is that the throne would always belong to his lineage. Whoever will be the messiah of any given generation must be a descendant of David.
The Hasmoneans were punished for taking the throne that belongs to David that all their descendants were killed out.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

The word "moshiach" just means "someone who is anointed". There are a number of people who are are anointed - and that's assuming it means someone who has literally been anointed.
It doesn't say, "most holy", it says "holy of holies", the name for the inner sanctuary of the Temple.

You'll have to specify which "the branch" you're referring to. Isa. 60:21 for instance is calling Israel the branch.

1. Are you saying you believe the inner sanctuary was what needed to be anointed?

2. It calls the Messiah the Prince, and says he would be cut off. You do agree this means he would be killed don't you?

3. So in which, if any of the following scriptures do you believe the Branch referred to is the Messiah? Isaiah 11:1; Jeremiah 23:5,6; 33:15; Zechariah 3:8; 6:12

 

[TrueBeliever37]

In one respect, yes.


Yes, yes and yes.


The promise to David is that the throne would always belong to his lineage. Whoever will be the messiah of any given generation must be a descendant of David.
The Hasmoneans were punished for taking the throne that belongs to David that all their descendants were killed out.

Wasn't the promise to David, that the Branch would grow up unto him, and he would never lack a man to sit upon the throne of Israel? Jeremiah 33:15-17
So if this was fulfilled in Solomon, who is on the throne now?

 

[Tumah]

Wasn't the promise to David, that the Branch would grow up unto him, and he would never lack a man to sit upon the throne of Israel? Jeremiah 33:15-17
So if this was fulfilled in Solomon, who is on the throne now?

No the passage is saying that there will always be someone available to sit on the throne from the Davidic line. Whichever generation we become worthy of having the messiah, has someone in it from the Davidic line who can potentially be the messiah.

 

[Tumah]

1. Are you saying you believe the inner sanctuary was what needed to be anointed?

It didn't need anointing, it would be anointed. Anointing was used to elevate someone/thing to a position of greatness. For instance, Cyrus is called G-d's anointed one. That doesn't mean that G-d anointed Cyrus with oil. Its a metaphor meaning that G-d appointed him to an important position.
Another example is Num. 18:8 it literally says, "...all of the holy things of the children of Israel, to you I have given them for anointing..." But its not talking about things that are anointed, its talking about the priestly gifts which were food products. What the verse there means as well, is that the Aaronic line was given the gifts as an expression of their elevated position over Israel.

That's what its saying here is that within the 70 weeks, the Sanctuary would be elevated to greatness. This is repeated in Haggai 2:9 "Great will be the honor of this last house from the first".

2. It calls the Messiah the Prince, and says he would be cut off. You do agree this means he would be killed don't you?

No, it doesn't call the messiah the prince. It says "[an] anointed [one, a] leader". Some people say it means "an anointed leader" but I think the adjective form would be 'mashuach" not "moshiach".

But anyway, these are two separate people. One is the "anointed leader" and the other is the "anointed". And there is a third who is just a "leader".

It does seem to be saying that the "anointed one" would die. This is the term used to indicate a sinner should die.

3. So in which, if any of the following scriptures do you believe the Branch referred to is the Messiah? Isaiah 11:1; Jeremiah 23:5,6; 33:15; Zechariah 3:8; 6:12

All of those refer to the messiah, although the Isa. 11:1 says "staff" and the others say, "sprout". It shouldn't be hard for you to figure out. Just use context clues. If the subject is "Israel" then it can't be talking about the messiah, could it? If the subject is "David", then there's a pretty good chance its talking about the messiah.

 

[rstrats]

TrueBeliever37,
re: "...who is on the throne now?"



Some say it's in England with Queen Elizabeth II (see "America and Britain in Prophecy" by David C. Pack).

 

[Amazing Mercy and Grace]

I have enjoyed reading this thread, and I would like to throw something out that hasn't been touched on yet.
Jesus never said the words "I am the Messiah or Christ".
There were three occasions where he could have, but chose not to.
Once is when he asked his disciples "who do you all say that I am" and Peter replied "The Messiah", and Jesus told them The Father revealed that to them, and then he warned them not to tell anybody else that.
Another time was with the woman at the well, and she said that "Messiah would come and reveal all things", and Jesus said "I that stand here talking to you am He".
Another time is when he was being pressed by the judge and asked "are you the Messish", and Jesus replied "it is as you say".
Jesus didn't want to be known as Messiah, he wanted to be known as "the son of man".

Interestingly, when Jesus was talking to his disciples he warned them " Be not deceived, in the last days False Christs [christians] and false prophets will arise and do great false signs and wonders, and lead many astray saying that I am Messiah / Christ."

To me, he is talking about these televangelist types who do fake miracles, fake healings, lying prophecy, lying signs and wonders, false words of knowledge - AND THEY SAY JESUS IS CHRIST.

Jesus was very clear that the deceivers in the last days would say jesus is christ or messiah. And they would prove it with lies.

So my question is "why do people call Jesus, Christ"?
He didn't want to be called Christ, and he never told anyone to tell people he is Christ.
Clearly Jesus didn't deny that he is Messiah, but he didn't want to be called that or have anyone teach that.

 

[Desert Snake]

It is kind of hard to discuss, if you don't explain what you think it is referring to.

In the Hebrew I have looked at it calls him the Moshiach, and the most Holy. Who do you believe it is referring to?

Do you believe it is referring to the Messiah in the scriptures where it refers to The Branch?

Judaism prophecy /prophetic books

different from


Christianity prophecy /prophetic books

 

[Ben Avraham]

I have enjoyed reading this thread, and I would like to throw something out that hasn't been touched on yet. Jesus never said the words "I am the Messiah or Christ". There were three occasions where he could have, but chose not to. Once is when he asked his disciples "who do you all say that I am" and Peter replied "The Messiah", and Jesus told them The Father revealed that to them, and then he warned them not to tell anybody else that. Another time was with the woman at the well, and she said that "Messiah would come and reveal all things", and Jesus said "I that stand here talking to you am He".
Another time is when he was being pressed by the judge and asked "are you the Messish", and Jesus replied "it is as you say". Jesus didn't want to be known as Messiah, he wanted to be known as "the son of man".

Interestingly, when Jesus was talking to his disciples he warned them " Be not deceived, in the last days False Christs [christians] and false prophets will arise and do great false signs and wonders, and lead many astray saying that I am Messiah / Christ." To me, he is talking about these televangelist types who do fake miracles, fake healings, lying prophecy, lying signs and wonders, false words of knowledge - AND THEY SAY JESUS IS CHRIST.
Jesus was very clear that the deceivers in the last days would say jesus is christ or messiah. And they would prove it with lies.

So my question is "why do people call Jesus, Christ"? He didn't want to be called Christ, and he never told anyone to tell people he is Christ. Clearly Jesus didn't deny that he is Messiah, but he didn't want to be called that or have anyone teach that.

Because of the definition of the term "Christ" which means "Anointed One." If it seems to you that Jesus didn't want to be called "Christ," or "Messiah", I agree with you but because Jesus did not want to speak as an individual. As part of the People he belonged to, it was a different story. Jesus was a learned Jew and he knew from Prophet Habakkuk 3:13 that, "HaShem goes forth to save His PEOPLE; to save His Anointed One." That's what Christ or Messiah stands for, the Anointed One of the Lord aka Israel, the Son of God if you read Exodus 4:22,23.

 

[pearl]

So my question is "why do people call Jesus, Christ"?

Its the answer ultimately given by the evangelists as to who Jesus was/is. The first gospel, Mark, Jesus imposes what is called a “messianic secret”. It is the gradual coming to terms, why Jesus, in the believing communities before the writing of the NT.

 

[Ben Avraham]

I'm just curious on what grounds do people believe Jesus was the Messiah? When i say Messiah i'm talking about the Jewish Messiah and the role he is supposed to play in the Jewish tradition of the coming Messianic Era.

Jesus could not have been the Messiah on two grounds: First because, the Messiah cannot be an individual. The individual is born, lives his span of life and dies. Are we supposed to expect a new Messiah in every generation? Obviously not! The Messiah is not supposed to die but to remain as a People before the Lord forever. (Jeremiah 31:35-37) Then, if you read Habakkuk 3:13, "The Lord goes forth to save His People; to save His Anointed One." That's what Messiah is, the Anointed One of the Lord aka Israel, the Son of God if you read Exodus 4:22,23.

And second, it is a very strong doctrine in the NT that Jesus was not a biological son of Joseph but of God with a earthly woman aka Mary. (Mat. 1:18) That's akin to the Greek myth of the demigod which is the son of a god with an earthly woman. Since Joseph was the one from the Tribe of Judah, Jesus could not have been the Messiah.

 

[Ben Avraham]

I don't see how Jesus is a descendant of David. Joseph wasn't really his father, therefore I don't see the connection.

The messiah must come from the bowels of a descendant of David. If you take "from the bowels" as meaning "biological," as I do, then the lineage fails.

I agree with your reasoning but, the point here is to convince Christianity. Christians like to bake their cake and
eat it too. It does not matter how logical one can be. They have agreed that Joseph was not Jesus' biological father
but God, although God could not be from the Tribe of Judah. Besides, Paul, the first Pope of Christianity decided he
was the Messiah if you you read II Timothy 2:8 and there is nothing we can do.

 

[Ben Avraham]

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

But it happens though that Jesus never had any thing to do with the NT. He never even dreamed the NT would ever rise. Perhaps Paul, if you think it through, qualified for the position of Messiah. There is a possibility that Paul was indeed the Messiah by proxy. The wonder is why he would pick up on Jesus to project himself as the one.

 

[Ben Avraham]

There are two genealogies of Jesus in the New Testament...one which shows him as a descendant of Nathan, and one that shows him of Solomon. But even the one that uses Solomon, as is required, fails to meet the criteria because Jesus is not a blood descendant of Joseph.

Keep going on your research Lintu! You are on the way of a great discovery.

 

[Ben Avraham]

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.

Okay GG, in what sense would Jesus have fitted the spiritual leader? Moses restored Israel from Egypt and back to the Promised Land and won the title of a Messianic Leader. Cyrus, king of Persia proclaimed freedom for the Jews and financed the rebuilding of the second Temple and did not win more than just the title of a Messianic leader with his money, influence and power in favor of the Jews.
(Isaiah 45:1) In the case of Jesus, the People were under foreign occupation when he was born, the occupation only got worse during his lifetime and soon after he died, the Temple was destroyed and the People taken into the longest exile of their History. How could Jesus have been the Messiah if he did not qualify even as a Messianic leader?

 

[Ron Hackel]

Messiah means anointed. The king was anointed with oil. Oil is symbolic of the Holy Spirit. Jesus was anointed by the Spirit in the river Jordan. The kiasm in Daniel 9 has the prophecy of Jesus coming as the Anointed One. He was to come 483 years after Artaxerxes decree to REBUILD AND RESTORE Jerusalem in 457 B.C. You can find the decree in Ezra 7:12-26. If you do the math it takes us to 27 A.D, the year Jesus was anointed. He is our King and High Priest and will be forever. It said in the last week of the prophecy he would be cut off and have nothing (crucified). He then gave the Jewish people one last chance to accept him as God-the final three years of the prophecy. As we know the sanhedrin stoned Stephen in 34, cementing their fate This has nothing to do with the nation of Israel. As Paul said:

ROMANS 9 : 6 "It is not as though God's word had failed. For not all who are descended from Israel are Israel.

It was not a bloodline but a character. Jacob pleaded with God saying, he could do nothing on his own. In others words saying take away my freewill, I want to depend entirely on you. There are many things to come in the future regarding Israel, but it has nothing to do with literal Jews.