Messiah: Man or Idea?

[jewscout]

As a perspective you suggested, due to being Jewish i assume...

for the record i'm not...but i'm working on it...long story...

This was illustrated to have the ability to take one of three meanings, one being that the Machiyach is the annointed one of the Messiah, implying that the Mashiyach is seperate frojm the Messiah concept, though the word in english is dirivitive.

again i would like to see what Jewish source work you gathered this information from...
the title "Messiah" comes originally from the aramaic of the Hebrew Moshiach
this however does not seperate the 2 terms, it is only a different way of saying it...

My point has yet to be touched as we have been dealing with semantics and Jewish and Christian writings of a concept.

well technically i'm dealing with Jewish text exclusively not christian...christianity has a very different concept of who and what the Messiah is.

The concept we are dealing with is the second coming in this case

ohhhhhhhhhhh see here i thought we were talking about the term Messiah and here i thought you were with me on the whole looking at it from the original Jewish perspective...had i known that we were talking about christian concepts i would have bowed out long ago and allowed someone better versed in Christian text and theology enter the discussion

or we could go back and look at the multitude of first comings that have been individually noted.

first comings??? again are talking about the Jewish or Christian concept of "Messiah" because in Judaism there is only one coming of the Moshiach...

Due to a synthesis of all i have ever read on the subject from a huge variety of sources over the past several decades i have garnered the concept that the Messiah is an idea and not a person.
You want that annotated i will say, anami 2005.
If you wanted me to annotate all of the works that built this synthesis i would say you are nuts

well then i guess i'm nuts!

but then again anami tell me now so i can direct SOGFFP or Netdoc here...are you talking about the Christian concept of the Messiah or the Jewish one? because they are very different and by what i'm reading in this last post this is not a discussion about the Jewish Moshiach...there is no "second coming" in judaism

 

[anami]

for the record i'm not...but i'm working on it...long story...

You call yourself jewscout, you list judism as your religion, you debate using Jewish terms and literature, it is reasonable for me to think you are Jewish, don't get wierd about it.

again i would like to see what Jewish source work you gathered this information from...

Again, i am not Jewish. The only source material i have used is what has been provided in this thread. Being a pantheologist i pose my ideas and wait for others to mention things from faiths and then i use those mentionings to proove my point, because somehow someone is always inclined to put things i can use. JW's are actually my favorite for that when they are at my door, they hand me apacket and i start reading. Let's just say i am red flagged, one girl always comes back but she always has to bring a new person with her The point is i like to explain my beliefs within the perameters of the person i am talking to's faith.

the title "Messiah" comes originally from the aramaic of the Hebrew Moshiach
this however does not seperate the 2 terms, it is only a different way of saying it...

ok, this is your claim, that this is directly where this utilized english word comes from. i have been going from that point because i saw no reson not to. Now i do though. The aramaic of the hebrew? Again that gets a que pas es? It is highly debateable as to it being a different way of saying it or it having multiple methods of useage. BAsed on what you say here i will revert to the text given by Enhanced spirit. As that is Text not your personal assumption of someone now claiming not to be Jewish????

well technically i'm dealing with Jewish text exclusively not christian...christianity has a very different concept of who and what the Messiah is.

As you recall i asked Micheal not to confuse this discussion by throwing in Christian texts that further convoluted the concepts as the jewish text in question came first.

ohhhhhhhhhhh see here i thought we were talking about the term Messiah and here i thought you were with me on the whole looking at it from the original Jewish perspective...had i known that we were talking about christian concepts i would have bowed out long ago and allowed someone better versed in Christian text and theology enter the discussion

Very funny... oh were you serious, is it wise to alweays assume every conversation to be from a jewish perspective??
Have you assumed, dispite my telling you that i was not, That i am jewish?

Again i am pantheological, so are you only willing to debate with other jews when disscussing Messiah? i am looking at it from a jewish perspective because you claimed to be jewish and i was being easy on you. We are, however, talking about concepts. Which don't go to church or synagoge

first comings??? again are talking about the Jewish or Christian concept of "Messiah" because in Judaism there is only one coming of the Moshiach...
well then i guess i'm nuts!

Wows, jews and christians as far as the eye can see... NOT!
ok, i propose the messiah is a new level of understanding a concept or an idea. This chucks out both Jews and Christies because they both share the veiw you are arguing that the messiah is human, scratch that some think of as more, a person. So who is the marchiach, moses? If there is one coming who was it or who is it going to be? And while christians think there are two...let this twist your panties into a bunch...

Shall i list human prophets who have carried the messiah?
Let's save time and do a short list
Krishna
all of the Taras
Hanuman
Budda
Moses
Muhammed
Bahallah allah
Jesus
etc.

And the increasing number alive today at our current state of evolution and cosmic history.

So do you want to stop argueing with me now simply because i belive in multiple comings of a message over a single coming of a person who is to be king?

but then again anami tell me now so i can direct SOGFFP or Netdoc here...are you talking about the Christian concept of the Messiah or the Jewish one? because they are very different and by what i'm reading in this last post this is not a discussion about the Jewish Moshiach...there is no "second coming" in judaism

There are more than two religions in the world, and no one can steal the concept behinh the word messiah, no matter how heartely they cling to the word itself. Besides Scott is catholic, and i don't debate with people who say that by any subject their word is the end of it.

 

[jewscout]

You call yourself jewscout, you list judism as your religion, you debate using Jewish terms and literature, it is reasonable for me to think you are Jewish, don't get wierd about it.

i'm not...

It is highly debateable as to it being a different way of saying it or it having multiple methods of useage. BAsed on what you say here i will revert to the text given by Enhanced spirit.

why? you threw it out when you threw out michel's text...both deal w/ the exact same verses from Daniel

Very funny... oh were you serious, is it wise to alweays assume every conversation to be from a jewish perspective??

no it's not and i don't...we got into a converstation on the jewish meaning of the word...had you come out and said you wanted to look at it from different perspectives, say a christian and a muslim or some other pespective i would have said what i've been saying...this is a jewish concept of the term: blah blah blah

Again i am pantheological, so are you only willing to debate with other jews when disscussing Messiah?

nice assumption...
no but i do discuss the concept coming from a traditionally Jewish perspetive as that is the faith i practice now...whenever i discuss this concept, especially w/ christians, i always preface it by saying "this is the Jewish concept"

Have you assumed, dispite my telling you that i was not, That i am jewish?

no not once

i am looking at it from a jewish perspective because you claimed to be jewish and i was being easy on you.

why would you take it easy on me because you thought i was jewish...

We are, however, talking about concepts. Which don't go to church or synagoge

but they are taken from scripture, and the concept of the Moshiach and his coming is one of the central components of the Jewish faith...

If there is one coming who was it or who is it going to be?

we are not to know nor are we to try to predict it...he will come in G-d's time

So do you want to stop argueing with me now simply because i belive in multiple comings of a message over a single coming of a person who is to be king?

well i will not necessarily stop talking to you but i make it a point to not say that the jewish perspective is the end all and be all of faiths...i defend the teachings and ideas of it the best i can but if that is your belief (and i don't necessarily disagree w/ you i believe HaShem has sent many messangers but the Moshiach ben David from a jewish perspective is a person)
if this is your belief i find that this sort of arguing gets very tiring very quickly because we will probably not budge in our beliefs...

There are more than two religions in the world, and no one can steal the concept behinh the word messiah, no matter how heartely they cling to the word itself

ok now we are getting somewhere...if a group takes that word and makes it their own, as christianity has done, then for them that is the meaning of the word...i'm just saying this is the traditional jewish perspective on the subject...once we get outside of that i'm not versed enough on other faiths and religion to get into the context of the word in their faith so i try not to disrespect their faiths by pretending in know what i'm talking about

i can see it now...you may ask me if i say i am not jewish then why do i profess the jewish faith...i will answer this as well as i can...i am studying the faith and wish to convert...i practice it, pray in hebrew, and attend shul on Shabbat...but doing these things does not make a Gentile a jew...you must be converted by a rabbi and that takes much time and study...so until that process is over i am halachically not jewish

 

[anami]

no it's not and i don't...we got into a converstation on the jewish meaning of the word...had you come out and said you wanted to look at it from different perspectives, say a christian and a muslim or some other pespective i would have said what i've been saying...this is a jewish concept of the term: blah blah blah

At what point did we agree to look at this from a Jewish point of view, i was only requesting that literature that had been conformed should be used in it's original form as it already was, to reduce confusion.

This thread is not about Jewish common thought on the word messiah, it is about the concept of a savior or a messiah and what form it might take.

no but i do discuss the concept coming from a traditionally Jewish perspetive as that is the faith i practice now...whenever i discuss this concept, especially w/ christians, i always preface it by saying "this is the Jewish concept"

i for one are not a christian.
And while you can simply profess the views you percieve of a faith. You must allow others to take the option of coming to their own conclusions.

why would you take it easy on me because you thought i was jewish...

i am not taking it easy on you because your Jewish, i am taking it easy on you because i read on a thread somewhere that you are a teenager.

well i will not necessarily stop talking to you but i make it a point to not say that the jewish perspective is the end all and be all of faiths

i am confused, are you saying Judism is or is not the end all beall of faiths. If you believe this it will be very hard to express my ideas to you.

ok now we are getting somewhere...if a group takes that word and makes it their own, as christianity has done, then for them that is the meaning of the word...i'm just saying this is the traditional jewish perspective on the subject...once we get outside of that i'm not versed enough on other faiths and religion to get into the context of the word in their faith so i try not to disrespect their faiths by pretending in know what i'm talking about

i am saying, that in any faith the archatype of the messenger is more about the idea than the carrier.

 

[jewscout]

At what point did we agree to look at this from a Jewish point of view, i was only requesting that literature that had been conformed should be used in it's original form as it already was, to reduce confusion.

very well anami, i shall take a break from the thread and allow members of other faiths to give their opinions on this concept. I encourage anyone reading this thread to post what you and your faith feel about this as i have no doubt the opinions will be wide and varying...

And while you can simply profess the views you percieve of a faith. You must allow others to take the option of coming to their own conclusions.

i do...but if i've been torah thumping i wish to publicly apologize to you and everyone on RF...i did not feel that i was...

i am not taking it easy on you because your Jewish, i am taking it easy on you because i read on a thread somewhere that you are a teenager

i'm 23 and a college graduate...even if i was a teenager i wouldn't expect to have anyone "take it easy" on me like i'm some kind of charity...

i am confused, are you saying Judism is or is not the end all beall of faiths. If you believe this it will be very hard to express my ideas to you.

NO

i am saying, that in any faith the archatype of the messenger is more about the idea than the carrier

i'm sure in many faiths this holds some truth which is why i encourage everyone to participate so that i am not bogarting the thread w/ simply jewish concepts...

 

[EnhancedSpirit]

My point has yet to be touched as we have been dealing with semantics and Jewish and Christian writings of a concept.

The concept we are dealing with is the second coming in this case, or we could go back and look at the multitude of first comings that have been individually noted.

If we are talking about the second coming. The word messiah is not even used in the New Testament. Not once. Messiah is not a word that was used to label one person. It was a label for a specific role in their society. It seems that you are starting to argue in circles, chasing your own tail. If you want to discuss the second coming, you will have to take it somewhere else, because this thread is about the word messiah, and this word is not used anywhere in the discussion of the second coming. This is because Jesus will not come as a messiah, he will not come as a man.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

We are discussing possible interpretations of the concept behind the word Messiah.

You should read more Lewis Carroll. Best I can tell, 'pantheology' as you represent it is simple a sophomoric and pretentious excuse for an ignorance of philology.

 

[anami]

If we are talking about the second coming. The word messiah is not even used in the New Testament. Not once. Messiah is not a word that was used to label one person. It was a label for a specific role in their society. It seems that you are starting to argue in circles, chasing your own tail. If you want to discuss the second coming, you will have to take it somewhere else, because this thread is about the word messiah, and this word is not used anywhere in the discussion of the second coming. This is because Jesus will not come as a messiah, he will not come as a man.

We are not talking about the second coming per se.

The concept we are dealing with is the second coming in this case, or we could go back and look at the multitude of first comings that have been individually noted.

1. Talking about the messiah coming of whitch many firsts a proposed second and a plausable current stasis, have all been suggested. Not just a second coming for you to disprove by there being no "word messiah" in the NT.

2. We are dicussing the concept not the word or where it comes from or where it is.
So the christian tenats claim that the "second" (forty second) coming will be not in the form of a man as the NT doesn't use the word messiah.

You attribute this to saying that the messiah then means a man, no man no word messiah. Exceot the christian faith has called it for years "the second coming of the messiah"
And they say it comes in the form of a bright light from the heavens, not in the form of a man. So i would say this actually backs up the idea that themessiah is a concept, message, or level of understanding.

3. Please read the thread, the term second coming is very recent in it as we are discussing the concept of the word messiah.

We can call it something else if you want, this thread began because i stated in another thread that
the concept behind the word messiah reffers to an idea or new level of understanding.

 

[anami]

You should read more Lewis Carroll. Best I can tell, 'pantheology' as you represent it is simple a sophomoric and pretentious excuse for an ignorance of philology.

i can't possible read more Lewis Carroll.

How ever your "best you can tell" about my faith is based on so little it would be silly of you to make assumptions about what i believ, given the very little about it i have posted on this site.

You are making wierd blind assumptions about someone you know nothing about, assessing what you think of what i believe, which you do not know.

If you knew what pantheology is or even what it is to me, you wouldn't make yourself look like an ignorant hateful fool by trying to insult me by calling it "it is a simple a sophomoric and pretentious excuse for an ignorance of philology."


So if i am proving myself ignorant of it, it is nothing like it.
So my interpretation of pantheology is very differnt to your understanding of philology. That wasn't what you were trying to say, was it?
It is hard to be sophomoric AND pretentious, although, you that last time, and me this time we both succeed! Of course to answer such an immature and pretentious respons one must join in.

So were you just trying out all the big words you know in a sentence, because i don't think you said what you think you said.

 

[anami]

NOW

The messiah man or idea

WHAT DO YOU THINK?

 

[Nitai]

Hare Krishna

codes about messiah

* humans are conditioned to enjoying material life
* how could anyone of them become a messiah?
* Messiah means qualification, he has love of God
* there is a process of purification by which one can attain love of God
* however, its very rear that one develops pure love of God
* REASON: influence of materialism is very strong

* QUESTION: is it possible to become messiah?
* if you so desire, so that you became a famous person you will certainly not become Messiah
* QUESTION: is it possible to become messiah?
* if God don't want you to become messiah you will certainly not become a messiah. If he wants you to become a messiah nobody will be able to stop you.
* QUESTION: what should I do to become a messiah?
* in an impure stage of existence when one has still material desires one should just endeavor to please God, not desiring anything else
* also don't desire to become messiah.
* when you become pure if God will desire you to become messiah you will be blessed by Him to save many of this material world.

* CONCLUSION: just practice sincerely the process of purification and let God decide what He likes you to do in the future.
* become first a surrendered soul, a stanch lover of God.
* then you will like to do anything for Him, like a man does everything for woman.


Hare Krishna