The Credentials of Christ as the Promised Seed

[javajo]

The first verse of the first chapter of the first book of the New Testament comences with these astounding words: "The book of the generation of Jesus [Yeshua, meaning 'Savior'] Christ [Messiah, meaning 'Anointed One'], the son of David, the son of Abraham" (Mt 1:1). In Genesis 3:15 God foretold the coming of "the seed of the woman" who would crush the serpent's head. It would come through the line of Abraham who inherited the land, and of the royal line of David, as Messiah the King forever. Consider some of the credentials of Jesus as the Messiah:

His genealogy was available for all to examine in the House of records and was never questioned by the religious leaders who doubted him.

He was born in Bethlehem, the city of King David, as the Scriptures foretold the Messiah would be (Micah 5:2).

He was born of a virgin, the seed of a woman, as Isaiah prophesied (Isaiah 7:14).

He was born at the right time, as revealed by the precise chronology given by the prophet Daniel, After the sixty-two ‘sevens’ (weeks of years or 434 yrs after temple completed),the Anointed One will be put to death and will have nothing.(Daniel 9:26, see 24-26).

He performed miracles which the Old Testament attributed to the Messiah when he appeared and these miracles were recorded by many eyewitnesses.

These along with the many prophecies he fulfilled would indicate that he was indeed the stone the builders rejected, the chief corner stone and foundation of the Christian faith. When Jesus rode into Jerusalem as King the people shouted from Psalm 118, "Blessed is he who comes in the name of the LORD." The same Psalm which said, "The stone the builders rejected has become the cornerstone." For he came as the Lamb of God who takes away our sin the first time, but he shall come again and reign on the throne of David forever as Scripture has foretold.

[info from "Zion's Fire" vol. 22 no. 3...I don't agree with Pre-Wrath Rapture, however]

 

[Caladan]

Well that's the problem of not applying critical tools in reading the scriptures.
Isaiah has zero relevance to the christian bible. Isaiah was discussing the events during the time of the Northern kingdom of Israel and the southern kingdom of Judah, and their struggle with neighbouring kindgoms.
the same goes for the other prophetic text of the scripture. it is focused on the events during the time of the prophets, and a great deal of it focuses on the jews and their relationship with the babylonians and the assyrians.

 

[Blackdog22]

Well that's the problem of not applying critical tools in reading the scriptures.
Isaiah has zero relevance to the christian bible. Isaiah was discussing the events during the time of the Northern kingdom of Israel and the southern kingdom of Judah, and their struggle with neighbouring kindgoms.
the rest goes for the other prophetic text of the scripture. it is focused on the events during the time of the prophets, and a great deal of it focuses on the jews and their relationship with the babylonians and the assyrians.

Bingo! Christians always speak of context, but when it comes to prophesy it seems that context doesn't really matter...

disclaimer: This does not apply to all Christians.

 

[javajo]

Well that's the problem of not applying critical tools in reading the scriptures.
Isaiah has zero relevance to the christian bible. Isaiah was discussing the events during the time of the Northern kingdom of Israel and the southern kingdom of Judah, and their struggle with neighbouring kindgoms.
the rest goes for the other prophetic text of the scripture. it is focused on the events during the time of the prophets, and a great deal of it focuses on the jews and their relationship with the babylonians and the assyrians.

Perhaps, but even Jesus had a LOT to say about how he had to do things like go to Jerusalem, be mocked, scourged and killed and rise the third day in order that scripture might be fulfilled. He also claimed to be the Messiah and spoke of himself as the stone the builders rejected and of the one who was referred to when David said the Lord spoke to my Lord...

He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. Mt 16:15-17

Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes? Mt 21:42

And Jesus answered and said, while he taught in the temple, How say the scribes that Christ is the son of David? For David himself said by the Holy Ghost, The LORD said to my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool. David therefore himself calleth him Lord; and whence is he then his son? And the common people heard him gladly. Mk 12:35-37

 

[tumbleweed41]

Perhaps, but even Jesus had a LOT to say about how he had to do things like go to Jerusalem, be mocked, scourged and killed and rise the third day in order that scripture might be fulfilled. He also claimed to be the Messiah and spoke of himself as the stone the builders rejected and of the one who was referred to when David said the Lord spoke to my Lord...

What you just said was that Jesus did what he thought was prophesy. (Self fulfilled prophesy).
Proclaimed himself the Messiah.
And spoke of himself as if he were fulfilling David's speaking of the Lord.

These are hardly credentials.

 

[javajo]

What you just said was that Jesus did what he thought was prophesy. (Self fulfilled prophesy).
Proclaimed himself the Messiah.
And spoke of himself as if he were fulfilling David's speaking of the Lord.

These are hardly credentials.

Yes, he did do some things "according to scripture", but I believe many prophesies he fulfilled were not something he could just make happen as a mere human. He could not choose where he was born, in Bethlehem, the City of David, or that he was born in the royal lineage of David and the tribe of Judah. Or that he was betrayed for 30 pieces of silver that were thrown down on the floor of the temple and used to buy a potter's field. Or that his hands and feet would be pierced or he'd be buried in a rich man's tomb. There are many more messianic prophecies he fulfilled that he could not just manipulate.

 

[michel]

Bingo! Christians always speak of context, but when it comes to prophesy it seems that context doesn't really matter...

disclaimer: This does not apply to all Christians.

I'm glad for the addition of that addendum!

 

[javajo]

The Messianic prophecies are not just bad Christian interpretation, but are and have been widely recognized by Jewish rabbis and theologians throughout the centuries. They were recognized by Old Testament Jews and Jesus and New Testament Jews, believers and nonbelievers in Christ alike. I believe Christ's credentials are obvious to all who honestly examine them.

Take for example the Micah prophecy that the Messiah would be born in Bethlehem. Even the religious leaders of Jesus' day believed the Messiah would come from Bethlehem. Take this passage for example:

"Philip findeth Nathanael, and saith unto him, We have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write (the Messiah), Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph. And Nathanael said unto him, Can there any good thing come out of Nazareth? Philip saith unto him, Come and see. Jesus saw Nathanael coming to him, and saith of him, Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile!" John 1:45-47

Nathaniel knew the Messiah did not come from Nazareth, but from Bethlehem. Jesus was born in Bethlehem, fled to Egypt, then came up out of Egypt--fulfilling another messianic prophecy, and lived in Nazareth. The evidence that Jesus is the Messiah is there, imo.

 

[earlwooters]

Go to the well. Ask Jewish people if Jesus was the Messiah. Jesus was a Jew. If he was the Messiah, they would know! How can a person who is not Jewish, tell them who is their Messiah and who is not? Do you believe them to be that ignorant? The Tanakh gives several specifications as to who the messiah will be. He will be a descendent of King David (2 Samuel 7:12-13; Jeremiah 23:5), observant of Jewish law (Isaiah 11:2-5), a righteous judge (Jeremiah 33:15), and a great military leader. These are things Jesus was not.

 

[Otherright]

Java Joe, you are in bold
Consider some of the credentials of Jesus as the Messiah:

Before we get started, he wasn't the messiah. He didn't fulfill anything the messiah was suppose to.

His genealogy was available for all to examine in the House of records and was never questioned by the religious leaders who doubted him.

No, but the scriptures allow us to question it, as Matthew and Luke give varying genealogies.

He was born in Bethlehem, the city of King David, as the Scriptures foretold the Messiah would be (Micah 5:2).

Really, Matthew and Luke say so. But...
Mark 6:1contradicts Matthew by identifying Nazareth as Jesus' birthplace.
John 7:41-43 also contradicts Matthew. It has people in a crowd rejecting Jesus as the Messiah because the Messiah was expected to come from Bethlehem in Judea, whereas Jesus was known to have come from Galilee.


He was born at the right time, as revealed by the precise chronology given by the prophet Daniel, After the sixty-two ‘sevens’ (weeks of years or 434 yrs after temple completed),the Anointed One will be put to death and will have nothing.(Daniel 9:26, see 24-26).

Well that settle it. 62 sevens always means Jesus.

He performed miracles which the Old Testament attributed to the Messiah when he appeared and these miracles were recorded by many eyewitnesses.

Really, many eye witnesses? Care to cite some for me? I think you know this is false.


These along with the many prophecies he fulfilled would indicate that he was indeed the stone the builders rejected, the chief corner stone and foundation of the Christian faith.

No doubt that he was the chief cornerstone of Christianity, but that does not make him divine.

 

[fallingblood]

Go to the well. Ask Jewish people if Jesus was the Messiah. Jesus was a Jew. If he was the Messiah, they would know! How can a person who is not Jewish, tell them who is their Messiah and who is not? Do you believe them to be that ignorant? The Tanakh gives several specifications as to who the messiah will be. He will be a descendent of King David (2 Samuel 7:12-13; Jeremiah 23:5), observant of Jewish law (Isaiah 11:2-5), a righteous judge (Jeremiah 33:15), and a great military leader. These are things Jesus was not.

Actually, Jesus was said to be a descendant of King David. He was observant of the Law (he was a Jew, he followed the law, and even stated that his followers must follow the law). As for being a righteous judge, that can be somewhat seen.

He wasn't a great military leader; however, that wasn't necessary either. There were various ideas of who the Messiah would be. A great military leader was not fully needed.

 

[fallingblood]

His genealogy was available for all to examine in the House of records and was never questioned by the religious leaders who doubted him.

There are two genealogies that are listed. One is in Matthew, the other is in Luke. They disagree with each other. They vastly disagree with each other. And yes, this was pointed out by the religious leaders around the time of the Gospels. That is why Christian writers had to defend the two genealogies.

He was born in Bethlehem, the city of King David, as the Scriptures foretold the Messiah would be (Micah 5:2).

This is very unlikely. Matthew and Luke don't agree on nearly anything regarding this. Matthew has the family of Jesus living in Bethlehem. Luke has them traveling there for a census that never occurred during that time.

Mark has no idea of Jesus being born in Bethlehem, and just states that he is from Nazareth. The birth narratives simply are highly suspicious, as they agree on nearly nothing.

He was born of a virgin, the seed of a woman, as Isaiah prophesied (Isaiah 7:14).

Isaiah has nothing to do with Jesus. The actual term is young woman, and she was probably already with child.

He was born at the right time, as revealed by the precise chronology given by the prophet Daniel, After the sixty-two ‘sevens’ (weeks of years or 434 yrs after temple completed),the Anointed One will be put to death and will have nothing.(Daniel 9:26, see 24-26).

What temple? Because the second temple wasn't completed until after Jesus was dead. And there was no such requirement for this anyway. That is why the Jews do not know when the Messiah is going to come back.

He performed miracles which the Old Testament attributed to the Messiah when he appeared and these miracles were recorded by many eyewitnesses.

Elijah and Elisha also performed those miracles. There were others in the first century who were said to perform the same miracles as well. And no eyewitnesses recorded any of this. Paul never mentions any miracles, and he is the first person to write about Jesus.

These along with the many prophecies he fulfilled would indicate that he was indeed the stone the builders rejected, the chief corner stone and foundation of the Christian faith. When Jesus rode into Jerusalem as King the people shouted from Psalm 118, "Blessed is he who comes in the name of the LORD." The same Psalm which said, "The stone the builders rejected has become the cornerstone." For he came as the Lamb of God who takes away our sin the first time, but he shall come again and reign on the throne of David forever as Scripture has foretold.

He fulfilled prophecies that had nothing to do with the Messiah. He performed prophecies that were not attributed to the Messiah until after Jesus supposedly fulfilled them.

Simply, Jesus is not the Jewish Messiah. As soon as he died, he was disqualified.

 

[Poisonshady313]

The Messianic prophecies are not just bad Christian interpretation, but are and have been widely recognized by Jewish rabbis and theologians throughout the centuries.

The list of messianic prophecies offered by Christians is very different than the list of messianic prophecies offered by Jews.

The Christian set of messianic prophecies is indeed bad Christian interpretation.

 

[idav]

The list of messianic prophecies offered by Christians is very different than the list of messianic prophecies offered by Jews.

The Christian set of messianic prophecies is indeed bad Christian interpretation.

I agree with this however it is based on the interpretation of Jesus who seemed familiar with Jewish texts. Jesus obviously disageed with the Pharisees on many issues.

 

[fallingblood]

I agree with this however it is based on the interpretation of Jesus who seemed familiar with Jewish texts. Jesus obviously disageed with the Pharisees on many issues.

Not really. Jesus didn't disagree with the Pharisees on anything really major. There were some small disagreements, but that was part of Judaism during that time.

The interpretation of these texts do not come from Jesus though. They come from later followers of Jesus who, believing that Jesus was the Messiah, searched the scriptures in order to confirm their faith.

 

[James Humphreys]

The list of messianic prophecies offered by Christians is very different than the list of messianic prophecies offered by Jews.

The Christian set of messianic prophecies is indeed bad Christian interpretation.

Most Christians view Isaiah 53 as prophesying the suffering and death of the Messiah, while many Jews see the "suffering servant" as referring to the course that the Jewish people as a whole have to walk. But couldn't both be true? If a prophesy really comes from God it should have enough depth of meaning that people of different ages and situations can draw valid meaning from it.

 

[idav]

Not really. Jesus didn't disagree with the Pharisees on anything really major. There were some small disagreements, but that was part of Judaism during that time.

The interpretation of these texts do not come from Jesus though. They come from later followers of Jesus who, believing that Jesus was the Messiah, searched the scriptures in order to confirm their faith.

We've had this disagreement before. I will post the verse I gave before and tell me that Jesus is giving the orthodox jewish interpretation. Whether christians later added these words to Jesus is another matter entirely.

Matthew 12
39 He answered, “A wicked and adulterous generation asks for a sign! But none will be given it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. 40 For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of a huge fish, so the Son of Man will be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.

 

[fallingblood]

We've had this disagreement before. I will post the verse I gave before and tell me that Jesus is giving the orthodox jewish interpretation. Whether christians later added these words to Jesus is another matter entirely.

There was no orthodox Jewish interpretation at that time.

As for the Jesus stating anything about the sign of Jonah. Highly unlikely. Especially considering that it would have been a failed prophecy anyways. Jesus was not in the belly of the earth, according to the Gospels, for three days and three nights. Also, that really isn't a sign anyway. Being in the belly of the whale, for Jonah had nothing to do with producing a sign.

 

[idav]

There was no orthodox Jewish interpretation at that time.

As for the Jesus stating anything about the sign of Jonah. Highly unlikely. Especially considering that it would have been a failed prophecy anyways. Jesus was not in the belly of the earth, according to the Gospels, for three days and three nights. Also, that really isn't a sign anyway. Being in the belly of the whale, for Jonah had nothing to do with producing a sign.

It is obvious that the character of Jesus looked at things differently and viewed the role of what was supposed to be the messiah in somewhat different ways. A lot of it I'm sure stemmed from the fanaticism of John the baptist. Taking the OT however you want is the easiest way to self fullfil prophecy. With you saying christians did it cause jesus wouldn't have said those things, one may as well just discount most the sayings and actions of Jesus in which case Jesus fullfilled nothing.

 

[fallingblood]

It is obvious that the character of Jesus looked at things differently and viewed the role of what was supposed to be the messiah in somewhat different ways. A lot of it I'm sure stemmed from the fanaticism of John the baptist. Taking the OT however you want is the easiest way to self fullfil prophecy. With you saying christians did it cause jesus wouldn't have said those things, one may as well just discount most the sayings and actions of Jesus in which case Jesus fullfilled nothing.

Jesus was hardly unique. John the Baptist was hardly unique. They are not formed in a bubble. They both were influenced by the Judaisms of their time.

If Jesus had taken such a fanatical view, and preached so much about him being the Messiah, while clearly taking the OT out of context, that would have been mentioned. The Jewish leaders would have had a very good case against him, and most likely, he would have been seen as a lunatic. And it is highly unlikely that a Jew like Paul would have ever followed someone who clearly wasn't working within Judaism.

Paul is our earliest source, and he doesn't mention those prophecies. It isn't until later that we see more and more supposed prophecies enter into the story of Jesus. There is a reason why these prophecies continue to grow. It isn't because people are just remembering what Jesus said, it is because his followers are adding additional information.

And really, one can discount much of what Jesus is supposed to have said and did as being non-historical.