Moses said, Unto him ye shall hearken

[Jayhawker Soule]

Actually, I thought Redemptionsong's questions were pretty good. But then I believe Jesus is the one Moses was referring to.

Sorry.

 

[YoursTrue]

Sorry.

OK. Of course, many people have different ways of looking at Jesus. And we know that not all groups, sects, or religions see Jesus the same way, even if they think Moses was foretelling the coming of the one I think and believe is the Messiah, Jesus Christ. I don't 'see' Jesus the way many others may see him. I hope you understand.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I hope you understand.

What I do understand is the penchant of some to twist Jewish text to serve Christian theology. It's disrespectful at best.

 

[YoursTrue]

What I do understand is the penchant of some to twist Jewish text to serve Christian theology. It's disrespectful at best.

I'm not sure what you're referring to, but Maimonides didn't think Moses meant Joshua, did he, as the coming Messiah? I'm not here to argue about Jesus in particular, but what are you looking for in a successor to Moses, a prophet greater than he was?
P.S. Anyone who imagines America will think again has a problem. Similar to wondering if the nation of Israel will be of one religious mind in reference to expecting the Messiah.

 

[Mitty]

I'm not sure what you're referring to, but Maimonides didn't think Moses meant Joshua, did he, as the coming Messiah? I'm not here to argue about Jesus in particular, but what are you looking for in a successor to Moses, a prophet greater than he was?
P.S. Anyone who imagines America will think again has a problem. Similar to wondering if the nation of Israel will be of one religious mind in reference to expecting the Messiah.

But why on Earth would Moses or his contemporaries be interested in someone who wasn't their contemporary and was born 1300 years or so later?

 

[YoursTrue]

What I do understand is the penchant of some to twist Jewish text to serve Christian theology. It's disrespectful at best.

Since I don't know exactly what you're talking about in reference to twist the texts, I can only agree that some certainly do twist the texts. But that does not mean that Jesus is not the foretold Messiah. And so out of respect, I won't go any further to ask you what you think. But it's late Friday night, and I don't know you, but maybe you won't be available until tomorrow evening. (An evening and a morning, the next day...)

 

[Redemptionsong]

So why didn't Jesus' family believe that he was a prophet (Matt 13:55-58 Mark 6:4 Luke 4:24 John 7:5) and is that why he rejected them (Matt 12:46-50)?

And did the boozers believe that he was a prophet when he performed a simple conjuring trick with some previously hidden wine to irresponsibly make the already "well drunk" boozers even drunker instead of responsibly suggesting they drink the water instead to help sober up (John 2:1-10)?

So who was David's "my Lord", given that Psalm 110 is written in the past and present tense? And doesn't change the fact that Psalm 2:6-7 obviously refers to David who was also a king as well as his god's begotten son, given that it is written in the first person and in the past and present tense, and not in the third person and the future tense.

For thirty years Jesus lived under the law doing no miracles. It should come as no surprise that those who were family and neighbours should think it strange when he appears after his baptism as the Anointed of God. His claim to be the Messiah, in Nazareth (Luke 4), was just the beginning.

The miracle of the water into wine has a deeper significance, as Christ's Spirit is represented by new wine.

As regards Psalms 2 and 110, it seems odd that you should explain these in terms of the 'type', or temporal figure, rather than the eternal. Is the son of God a man of corruption?

 

[Faithofchristian]

Deuteronomy 18:15-22 speaks of a coming Prophet. Muslims like to associate this passage with Muhammad, whilst Christians believe the Prophet is Jesus Christ.

What do Jews believe?

That passage of Deuteronomy 18:15-22,
Now just ask yourself..
Now why would God say to Moses that he would rise a prophet like unto Moses.

But yet that Prophet not be of Israel.
Which doesn't make no sense at all.

Of course Muhammad takes a lot of things and twist them into what he wants them to say.
But also have to remember that Muhammad could not read or write..
So Muhammad would People talking and tried to remember what they said and then tell his wife and she would write it down.
or have his friends to write for him..

Now how would Muhammad know for sure what they were writing down, Seeing that Muhammad couldn't read or write himself.

The Qu'ran was written about back in the year 625 A.D
And the bible dates back to 3000 to 5000 years ago.
So who copied who.
As many Muslims try to get people to believe that the Bible copied the Qu'ran.

 

[Redemptionsong]

I can only speak for myself. As written it seems like Joshua. Not that it cannot be Christ. This prophecy does not seem like a one time occurrence. I also see similarities with Moses and Ezra.

Extremely doubtful any of Ishmael's descendants are potential candidates though

The thing about prophecy is that it does work in cycles, but the culmination is the most perfect. This is why all prophecy ultimately points to Christ, lMO.

 

[Mitty]

For thirty years Jesus lived under the law doing no miracles. It should come as no surprise that those who were family and neighbours should think it strange when he appears after his baptism as the Anointed of God. His claim to be the Messiah, in Nazareth (Luke 4), was just the beginning.

Just fantasy words in a book including how Jesus could see China and India and Rome and South America from a high mountain (Luke 4:5).

The miracle of the water into wine has a deeper significance, as Christ's Spirit is represented by new wine.

That's obviously just a story about a simple conjuring trick, and that "the servants which drew the water knew" how the trick was done, even though it fooled the "well drunk" boozers. And doesn't mean that Jesus magically transmuted hydrogen and oxygen atoms into carbon atoms in order to irresponsibly make some "well drunk" boozers even drunker by magically transmuting 600 litres of water into good fully aged wine. And that's why Jesus was described as a boozer too, which he didn't deny (Matt 11:19).

As regards Psalms 2 and 110, it seems odd that you should explain these in terms of the 'type', or temporal figure, rather than the eternal. Is the son of God a man of corruption?

Doesn't change the fact that Psalm 2:6-7 says that David was his god's begotten son as well as the Jewish king. Which is why the biblical writers tried to link Jesus to David through the genealogies for his adoptive father (Matt 1) and for his biological father (Luke 3), and why the Romans mocked him as the "King of the Jews" when they executed him for sedition.

 

[exchemist]

I believe that all the literary prophets are used by God to look towards the one prophet who will speak, and live, God's word.

We can pretty much dismiss the Muslim claim that Muhammad is the prophet. Muhammad was not an Israelite, and it seems pretty clear from the text that the prophet mentioned would arise from amongst the twelve tribes of Israel.

I was not asking what you personally believe.

 

[Redemptionsong]

It means what it says: that the God of the Israelites will raise up from among the Israelites a leader/guide who will be, like Moses, a prophet as opposed to a soothsayer/augur.

Moses was the greatest of the prophets, according to many Jews, because it was to him that the Torah was delivered. You may also believe that Moses provides a word-for-word account of God's will and purpose.

If you do believe this, then we should take careful note of everything Moses says, and Moses says that we should listen to another future prophet, who will also speak God's words faithfully.

But I think there's more to being a prophet that just delivering the verbal message. Moses was used as the channel for God's signs and wonders, too. In fact, I believe it's consistently (I'm open to correction) the prophets through whom God works his miracles in the Tanakh.

So, to recognize 'that prophet' which should come, we are not just looking for a great prophet like Moses, but also a prophet who demonstrates his office with signs and wonders.

In the New Testament, the Samaritan woman that met Jesus at the well [John 4] said to him, 'Sir, I perceive that thou art a prophet'. Later she said, 'I know that the Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things'. Jesus said to her, 'I that speak unto thee am he'.

It seems to me that 'that prophet' prophesied by Moses must also be the Messiah.

 

[Redemptionsong]

Because Moses knows that he will not be around. Pretty simple; no Jesus required - but do feel free to carry on with your proselytizing by way of rhetorical questions.

You call it proselytizing, I call it speaking the truth, as I see it!

We are both able to read what God speaks through Moses in Deuteronomy 18:19, 'And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him'.

In Matthew 17:5. it says, 'While he [Peter] yet spake [to Jesus], behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them: and behold a voice out of the cloud, which said, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye him.'

I wonder if it will not be 'required' of all who choose not to listen. In John 5:46 Jesus said, 'For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me'.

 

[Mitty]

Moses was the greatest of the prophets, according to many Jews, because it was to him that the Torah was delivered. You may also believe that Moses provides a word-for-word account of God's will and purpose.

If you do believe this, then we should take careful note of everything Moses says, and Moses says that we should listen to another future prophet, who will also speak God's words faithfully.

But I think there's more to being a prophet that just delivering the verbal message. Moses was used as the channel for God's signs and wonders, too. In fact, I believe it's consistently (I'm open to correction) the prophets through whom God works his miracles in the Tanakh.

So, to recognize 'that prophet' which should come, we are not just looking for a great prophet like Moses, but also a prophet who demonstrates his office with signs and wonders.

In the New Testament, the Samaritan woman that met Jesus at the well [John 4] said to him, 'Sir, I perceive that thou art a prophet'. Later she said, 'I know that the Messias cometh, which is called Christ: when he is come, he will tell us all things'. Jesus said to her, 'I that speak unto thee am he'.

It seems to me that 'that prophet' prophesied by Moses must also be the Messiah.

Why would a real god wait another 1300 years after Moses had died to tell it's story, or are those stories just man-made?

Why couldn't the god tell Abraham or his ancestors? Afterall Abraham even had a face to face conversation with a god and shared a meal together (Gen 18)?

Or are those stories just man-made, given that biblical morality is obviously just man-made including the ten commandments since they didn't apply to Abraham or his ancestors. Which is why it wasn't morally wrong for Abraham to kill his son as a blood sacrifice or for Cain(an) to kill his brother Abel, or for Abraham to have a sexual relationship with his sister Sarah and commit adultery with Hagar.

 

[Samantha Rinne]

Was David the coming prophet, given that he was even his god's begotten son (Psalm 2:6-7) although he was an adulterous murderer who said that his love with Jonathon was more wonderful than with any of his wives?

David was a king. Not a prophet.

 

[Redemptionsong]

That's because Jesus is an alternative spelling of Joshua who Moses was presumably referring to as his successor.
Yeshua - Wikipedia

Alas, unless you can show us where Moses says that the prophet won't arrive until 1300 years or so later then you are just grasping at straws.

Can you not see that even Joshua was a 'type' of Christ? The names [Joshua/Jesus] mean the same thing, and whilst Joshua provides entry into the Promised Land, Christ provides entry into the Kingdom of God.

Do you not believe that the Hebrew scriptures pointed towards a Messiah? How can you explain the many specific references to the Messiah without acknowledging that the temporal, the corruptible 'types', are merely a 'shadow' of the eternal?

Furthermore, it's the Jews who were expecting a Messiah to arrive in the fifth millennium [Anno Mundi]. Here are words from the Talmud, Sanhedrin 97a-97b. 'The Tanna debe Eliyyahu teaches: The world is to exist six thousand years. In the first two thousand there was desolation; two thousand years the Torah flourished; and the next two thousand years is the Messianic era, but through our many iniquities all these years have been lost.'

The belief in a prophetic week is as old as Moses. Jews were expecting the Messiah at the end of the fourth, and into the fifth, millennium A.M. We also find this level of expectation evident in the New Testament. Why else would Simeon and Anna have been drawn to prophesy at the temple at the time of Christ's appearance? Why else did crowds gather to John [the Baptist] to ask if he were the Christ?

 

[Mitty]

David was a king. Not a prophet.

So who was Moses referring to, given that Jesus' family didn't believe that he was a prophet?
Was Moses referring to Joshua as his successor?

 

[Mitty]

Can you not see that even Joshua was a 'type' of Christ? The names [Joshua/Jesus] mean the same thing, and whilst Joshua provides entry into the Promised Land, Christ provides entry into the Kingdom of God.

Do you not believe that the Hebrew scriptures pointed towards a Messiah? How can you explain the many specific references to the Messiah without acknowledging that the temporal, the corruptible 'types', are merely a 'shadow' of the eternal?

Furthermore, it's the Jews who were expecting a Messiah to arrive in the fifth millennium [Anno Mundi]. Here are words from the Talmud, Sanhedrin 97a-97b. 'The Tanna debe Eliyyahu teaches: The world is to exist six thousand years. In the first two thousand there was desolation; two thousand years the Torah flourished; and the next two thousand years is the Messianic era, but through our many iniquities all these years have been lost.'

The belief in a prophetic week is as old as Moses. Jews were expecting the Messiah at the end of the fourth, and into the fifth, millennium A.M. We also find this level of expectation evident in the New Testament. Why else would Simeon and Anna have been drawn to prophesy at the temple at the time of Christ's appearance? Why else did crowds gather to John [the Baptist] to ask if he were the Christ?

It's just imaginative words in a book and has no relevance to the 21st century.

 

[Redemptionsong]

Just fantasy words in a book including how Jesus could see China and India and Rome and South America from a high mountain (Luke 4:5).

That's obviously just a story about a simple conjuring trick, and that "the servants which drew the water knew" how the trick was done, even though it fooled the "well drunk" boozers. And doesn't mean that Jesus magically transmuted hydrogen and oxygen atoms into carbon atoms in order to irresponsibly make some "well drunk" boozers even drunker by magically transmuting 600 litres of water into good fully aged wine. And that's why Jesus was described as a boozer too, which he didn't deny (Matt 11:19).

Doesn't change the fact that Psalm 2:6-7 says that David was his god's begotten son as well as the Jewish king. Which is why the biblical writers tried to link Jesus to David through the genealogies for his adoptive father (Matt 1) and for his biological father (Luke 3), and why the Romans mocked him as the "King of the Jews" when they executed him for sedition.

Miracles are from God, and if you choose to mock the miracles of the New Testament you should be consistent and mock the miracles of the Hebrew scriptures, such as parting the Red Sea. But, hang on, that leaves the Israelites stranded in Egypt.

And David. Is David alive today? I don't think so.

Did Ezekiel and others not say 'my servant David' was the Messiah? [See Ezekiel 34:23] So why would God not refer to his true son as 'my servant David'? Is the identity of the Messiah revealed by name in the Hebrew scriptures? Not explicitly, and for good reason.

And the genealogies. When the two genealogies of Jesus are combined they provide a perfect blend of David's seed and God's holiness.

Why the sign above the cross? Because the Messiah, Son of Joseph, was only recognized as King by a remnant of Jewish believers. Like King David before him, Jesus was anointed well before becoming King. It was only when Jesus ascended to heaven as the Son of man that he was given dominion over all in heaven and earth. You should read Daniel 7:13,14.

 

[Redemptionsong]

I was not asking what you personally believe.

Would you prefer it if I did not offer a personal opinion? I could say, instead, that the reason that the future prophet will not be a literary prophet of the Hebrew scriptures is because Jews do not believe that the Prophets or Writings have the same authority as the Torah. Moses has an authority greater than any other prophet of the Tanakh; yet he is prepared to say that the prophet to come will be a prophet 'LIKE UNTO ME'. The future prophet of which he speaks cannot be a lesser prophet.