• 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!

When was "the Messiah" first mentioned in scripture?

Colt

Well-Known Member
Yeah, that day started more than 40 years ago. That is how I am able to do the following.


The reason that there are no Jewish descendants today of the apostles is becuse Jesus as well as his followers were largely rejected by Jews and Judaism. Jesus was killed and so were his apostles mostly chased down and killed. A religion about Jesus found a more receptive audience among the Gentiles and Pagan adherents to the Mystery religions.

It's not surprising that the families of the apostles or early believers did not become Christians. Many were killed by the armies of Titus.


34Do not assume that I have come to bring peace to the earth; I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35For I have come to turn

‘a man against his father,

a daughter against her mother,

a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law.36A man’s enemies will be the members

of his own household.


Today Jewish activists are still trying to discredit Jesus.
 
Last edited:

Ehav4Ever

Well-Known Member
Strange! Why isn't this common knowledge? Do you live in a cave somewhere? RF will only let me list 5. There are many many more Jewish Rabbi's and such discussing the coming of Moshiach or Messiah.


Yeah, and what is funny is that every single one of them are describing something that is not similar at all with the Christian concept of a messiah found in the NT. Also, interesting is none of these rabbis when speaking Hebrew support the Christian concept of a messiah. Even more interesting is that these rabbis do not believe in jesus or the NT to be Davidic King or a (משיח).
 

Ehav4Ever

Well-Known Member
The reason that there are no Jewish descendants today of the apostles is becuse Jesus as well as his followers were largely rejected by Jews and Judaism.

Thus, Hashem made it clear that Jews were to stay away from Jesus and his students because they would not last anything more than 2 generations. So we agree, the Jewish followers jesus were not meant to have any continuation. They were meant to end almost as quickly as they started. I agree with you on that.

A religion about Jesus found a more receptive audience among the Gentiles and Pagan adherents to the Mystery religions.

Then we agree that if the audience of pagan adherents to mystery religions is what saw Christianity as acceptable it is a good things that Torath Mosheh Jews of that generation stayed away. We Jews should continue their example so we don't disappear the way the original Jewish Christians did. The Pagan adherents to the Mystery religions can keep what they were given.

It's not surprising that the families of the apostles or early believers did not become Christians. Many were killed by the armies of Titus.

So it is a good thing that Torath Mosheh Jews did not follow the actual historical jesus. There wouldn't be any Jews now if they had. Thanks to Hashem the Torath Mosheh Jews of that generation knew to distance themselves from those who developed the jesus/christian concept.

Today Jewish activists are still trying to discredit Jesus.

Actually, the authors of the NT did that. You have to take that up with them.
 
Last edited:

Ehav4Ever

Well-Known Member
Strange! Why isn't this common knowledge? Do you live in a cave somewhere? RF will only let me list 5. There are many many more Jewish Rabbi's and such discussing the coming of Moshiach or Messiah.


Interesting enough. Here is what one of the rabbis you listed in your videos stated about Christianity and jesus.

 

Shaul

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
I use Messiah as being synonymous with deliverer or Davidic type of king or moshiach. There are many vidios on the net of Rabbi's discussing the coming moshiach or Messiah. If the Talmud is a compilation of oral traditions from the centuries prior to Jesus then it would be relevant to the expectations in the times of Jesus.

Implicit is a good word! However, Jewish opposition to Jesus as Messiah is based on explicit citations of the scripture which indicates that there was an explicit expectation when Jesus was rejected? No?

It's a funny thing, these word games imply that it was all very murky but we are certain that Jesus wasn't! LoL!


NOTE: I do NOT believe that Jesus was the Jewish Messiah or moshiach that was "expected" in the age that Jesus was killed for in part, sort of adopting the position of moshiach ben David or Messiah, king of the Jews.

Jesus adopted the title "son of man" and the "Son of God".
I have pointed out that there is a distinct difference between "messiah" and "moshiach"(or more precisely the moshiach be David). You can continue to use whichever words you want to, obviously. But if you conflate distinct words that is upon you.
 

Colt

Well-Known Member
Yeah, and what is funny is that every single one of them are describing something that is not similar at all with the Christian concept of a messiah found in the NT. Also, interesting is none of these rabbis when speaking Hebrew support the Christian concept of a messiah. Even more interesting is that these rabbis do not believe in jesus or the NT to be Davidic King or a (משיח).
Well of course, they don't believe Jesus to have been the Mesiah. They discuss the Messiah that they are still looking for. When Jesus was on the earth there was an expectation as well.
 

Colt

Well-Known Member
More rabbis who don't support the Christian concept of a messiah. You are basically proving the point I was making.

Here is Rabbi Heschel Greenberg in a video contradicting what you wrote about jesus.

Of course, but they do have a concept of a coming Messiah. When Jesus was on the earth, they also had a concept and rigid expectations based on scripture.
 

Colt

Well-Known Member
I have pointed out that there is a distinct difference between "messiah" and "moshiach"(or more precisely the moshiach be David). You can continue to use whichever words you want to, obviously. But if you conflate distinct words that is upon you.
I reiterate that the Jewish people living in the times of Jesus ALSO had specific expectations which they derived from those "implicit" references among the prophets which btw are open to wide interpretation. I assume it's the same source that Judaism uses today in the development of a moshiach messiah.

* The assumption (by his followers) that Jesus was the Jewish Messiah was false, his kingdom was spiritual not material Israel.

* The confusion of the Christian Messiah is further compounded by the development of a theology that Jesus would someday return to do what he failed to do (as Messiah or moshiach) the first go around.

* To date the concept of a moshiach or whatever was expected at the time of Jesus, before, during, after and up until today, remains MIA!

* It's possible that someone like Melchizedek returns in the role of Messiah while Jesus remains the Son of God in his rightful place in heaven.
 

Ehav4Ever

Well-Known Member
Of course, but they do have a concept of a coming Messiah. When Jesus was on the earth, they also had a concept and rigid expectations based on scripture.

They don't have a Christian concept of a messiah. They also constantly keeping using the word (משיח) to describe a Torah based human Jewish person who is of Davidic descent. Again, they don't support your claims about what a (משיח) is. Several of them even discussed the difference with the Christian messiah concept.

Further, if you ask them if the English word "messiah" as used by Christians is what (משיח) means they will say no. Try leaving them a message and ask them.
 

Colt

Well-Known Member
They don't have a Christian concept of a messiah. They also constantly keeping using the word (משיח) to describe a Torah based human Jewish person who is of Davidic descent. Again, they don't support your claims about what a (משיח) is. Several of them even discussed the difference with the Christian messiah concept.

Further, if you ask them if the English word "messiah" as used by Christians is what (משיח) means they will say no. Try leaving them a message and ask them.
Yes, that's been established. However, they do have a concept which they do use in contrast with Jesus or the Christian idea/claims of a Messiah.

The question was answered earlier by Shaul. The later prophets implied a coming figure which was the basis for much speculation and conjecture which eventuated in certain expectations. The videos I provided feature Jewish men expounding upon those expectations.

IMOP The entire purpose for God choosing Abram was the establishment of a monotheistic culture for the reception of the Son of God incarnate on earth. Prophets foresaw his coming and the spiritual kingdom he would establish.

As Judaism evolved the Israelites developed a rigid wall of separation between themselves and the Gentile world. Being chosen went to their heads, they lost sight of what they were chosen for. Israel developed a nationalist identity comingled with the production of the priesthood which made it virtually impossible to except the teachings of Jesus. They broke the covenant, and the rest is a tragic sad history. The Israelites became unreachable.
 
Last edited:

Ehav4Ever

Well-Known Member
Yes, that's been established. However, they do have a concept which they do use in contrast with Jesus or the Christian idea/claims of a Messiah.

Given that the earliest surviving Christian writers were using Greek as their medium of communication it is clear that they developed a different concept. The concept more than likely was one that they borrowed from the early Jewish Christians who died out within two generations. There are some scholars that beleive that the early Jewish Christians got their concepts from the Essenes.

Thus, the concept of the historical early Jewish Christians was not the same as the writers of the Greek NT and later the Christian Church Fathers who developed the Christian messiah concept.

I.e. the original Jewish Christians most likely thought their leader was a potential (משיח)/Davidic King who was destined to lead the Israeli people. Yet, when he failed to live up to the Tanakh requirements, and the common requirements that existed for all Torath Mosheh Jews, or even the original Jewish Christian's personal expectations they [the original Jewish Christians] couldn't let go and had to invent a more advanced mythos to explain his failure.

These same Jewish Christians died out, in part, because they developed the idea of a second return that would happen in their generation which they had to be ready for. Thus, they stopped marrying, lived in communes, and seperated themselves from the Torath Mosheh Jews of that generation who did not agree with the Jewish Christian or Essene claims. As a result, the early Jewish Christians didn't make it past 2 generations since nothing they were doing was producing results.

This mythos that the original Jewish Christains created failed them and they died out, returned to Torath Mosheh Jewish communities when they realized their mistake, or disappeared into the non-Jewish world. This same mythos, when taken on by the non-Jewish Christians, and transported into Greek, was advanced and modified into the well known Christian messiah/deliverer/deliver from sin concept. This is further clear in the variations of how the Christian Greek bible authors tried to use (μεσσίας) in some instances to translate (משיח) while in others they used (χριστός).
 
Last edited:

Colt

Well-Known Member
I’m well aware of the objections to Jesus and the religion about Jesus that developed after he left.

IMOP this explains the situation that the Creator Son was confronted with when the answer to Abrams faith was finally realized in the incarnation of Christ:

Jews and Gentiles

121:7.1 (1339.6) By the times of Jesus the Jews had arrived at a settled concept of their origin, history, and destiny. They had built up a rigid wall of separation between themselves and the gentile world; they looked upon all gentile ways with utter contempt. They worshiped the letter of the law and indulged a form of self-righteousness based upon the false pride of descent. They had formed preconceived notions regarding the promised Messiah, and most of these expectations envisaged a Messiah who would come as a part of their national and racial history. To the Hebrews of those days Jewish theology was irrevocably settled, forever fixed.

121:7.2 (1339.7) The teachings and practices of Jesus regarding tolerance and kindness ran counter to the long-standing attitude of the Jews toward other peoples whom they considered heathen. For generations the Jews had nourished an attitude toward the outside world which made it impossible for them to accept the Master’s teachings about the spiritual brotherhood of man. They were unwilling to share Yahweh on equal terms with the gentiles and were likewise unwilling to accept as the Son of God one who taught such new and strange doctrines.

121:7.3 (1340.1) The scribes, the Pharisees, and the priesthood held the Jews in a terrible bondage of ritualism and legalism, a bondage far more real than that of the Roman political rule. The Jews of Jesus’ time were not only held in subjugation to the law but were equally bound by the slavish demands of the traditions, which involved and invaded every domain of personal and social life. These minute regulations of conduct pursued and dominated every loyal Jew, and it is not strange that they promptly rejected one of their number who presumed to ignore their sacred traditions, and who dared to flout their long-honored regulations of social conduct. They could hardly regard with favor the teachings of one who did not hesitate to clash with dogmas which they regarded as having been ordained by Father Abraham himself. Moses had given them their law and they would not compromise.

121:7.4 (1340.2) By the time of the first century after Christ the spoken interpretation of the law by the recognized teachers, the scribes, had become a higher authority than the written law itself. And all this made it easier for certain religious leaders of the Jews to array the people against the acceptance of a new gospel.

121:7.5 (1340.3) These circumstances rendered it impossible for the Jews to fulfill their divine destiny as messengers of the new gospel of religious freedom and spiritual liberty. They could not break the fetters of tradition. Jeremiah had told of the “law to be written in men’s hearts,” Ezekiel had spoken of a “new spirit to live in man’s soul,” and the Psalmist had prayed that God would “create a clean heart within and renew a right spirit.” But when the Jewish religion of good works and slavery to law fell victim to the stagnation of traditionalistic inertia, the motion of religious evolution passed westward to the European peoples.

121:7.6 (1340.4) And so a different people were called upon to carry an advancing theology to the world, a system of teaching embodying the philosophy of the Greeks, the law of the Romans, the morality of the Hebrews, and the gospel of personality sanctity and spiritual liberty formulated by Paul and based on the teachings of Jesus.

121:7.7 (1340.5) Paul’s cult of Christianity exhibited its morality as a Jewish birthmark. The Jews viewed history as the providence of God—Yahweh at work. The Greeks brought to the new teaching clearer concepts of the eternal life. Paul’s doctrines were influenced in theology and philosophy not only by Jesus’ teachings but also by Plato and Philo. In ethics he was inspired not only by Christ but also by the Stoics.

121:7.8 (1340.6) The gospel of Jesus, as it was embodied in Paul’s cult of Antioch Christianity, became blended with the following teachings:

121:7.9 (1340.7) 1. The philosophic reasoning of the Greek proselytes to Judaism, including some of their concepts of the eternal life.

121:7.10 (1340.8) 2. The appealing teachings of the prevailing mystery cults, especially the Mithraic doctrines of redemption, atonement, and salvation by the sacrifice made by some god.

121:7.11 (1340.9) 3. The sturdy morality of the established Jewish religion.

121:7.12 (1341.1) The Mediterranean Roman Empire, the Parthian kingdom, and the adjacent peoples of Jesus’ time all held crude and primitive ideas regarding the geography of the world, astronomy, health, and disease; and naturally they were amazed by the new and startling pronouncements of the carpenter of Nazareth. The ideas of spirit possession, good and bad, applied not merely to human beings, but every rock and tree was viewed by many as being spirit possessed. This was an enchanted age, and everybody believed in miracles as commonplace occurrences.” Urantia Book 1955
 

Ehav4Ever

Well-Known Member
I’m well aware of the objections to Jesus and the religion about Jesus that developed after he left.

Good, so now you understand why we Jews are not supposed to be Christians or to even entertain anything associated with Christianity. Hashem made it clear, for Torath Moshe Jews, to keep a healthy distance from anyone who is like the historical and mytholocal jesus.

If it is something that pleases the non-Jewish world then that is where it should stay.
 
Last edited:

Colt

Well-Known Member
Good, so now you understand why we Jews are not supposed to be Christians or to even entertain anything associated with Christianity. Hashem made it clear, for Torath Moshe Jews, to keep a healthy distance from anyone who is like the historical and mytholocal jesus.

If it is something pleases the non-Jewish world then that is where it should stay.
Sure! Jesus addressed this issue which his followers did NOT remain loyal to after he left. Attempts by the apostles and other followers of Jesus to bring their fellow Jews to the Gospel of the Kingdom only caused still more confusion.

*** I have conceded that Christians forced Jesus into some OT scriptures that had not previously been considered messianic. These Jewish followers of Jesus naturally sought to justify their conversion to the Jesus movement by pointing to OT scripture in order to buttress their decision. They didn't need to do that, Jesus didn't use the scripture to establish his authority.


"On Tuesday evening Jesus was conducting one of his customary classes of questions and answers when the leader of the six spies said to him: “I was today talking with one of John’s disciples who is here attending upon your teaching, and we were at a loss to understand why you never command your disciples to fast and pray as we Pharisees fast and as John bade his followers.” And Jesus, referring to a statement by John, answered this questioner: “Do the sons of the bridechamber fast while the bridegroom is with them? As long as the bridegroom remains with them, they can hardly fast. But the time is coming when the bridegroom shall be taken away, and during those times the children of the bridechamber undoubtedly will fast and pray. To pray is natural for the children of light, but fasting is not a part of the gospel of the kingdom of heaven. Be reminded that a wise tailor does not sew a piece of new and unshrunk cloth upon an old garment, lest, when it is wet, it shrink and produce a worse rent. Neither do men put new wine into old wine skins, lest the new wine burst the skins so that both the wine and the skins perish. The wise man puts the new wine into fresh wine skins. Therefore do my disciples show wisdom in that they do not bring too much of the old order over into the new teaching of the gospel of the kingdom. You who have lost your teacher may be justified in fasting for a time. Fasting may be an appropriate part of the law of Moses, but in the coming kingdom the sons of God shall experience freedom from fear and joy in the divine spirit.” And when they heard these words, the disciples of John were comforted while the Pharisees themselves were the more confounded.

147:7.3 Then the Master proceeded to warn his hearers against entertaining the notion that all olden teaching should be replaced entirely by new doctrines. Said Jesus: “That which is old and also true must abide. Likewise, that which is new but false must be rejected. But that which is new and also true, have the faith and courage to accept. Remember it is written: `Forsake not an old friend, for the new is not comparable to him. As new wine, so is a new friend; if it becomes old, you shall drink it with gladness." UB version 1955
 

rosends

Well-Known Member
But aren't you presuming the gospel accounts of what Jews at the time thought to be accurate? If the gospels are suspect then why think that their version of what Jews at the time said or thought is any less suspect?
 
Top