@Lightenup,

Jesus did not have a biological father.

Then we have a problem! The word for descendant used in the passages concerning David’s throne is “zera”, which means to produce after one’s own kind – making it biological. Did you not read Num 1:2, 18, 2:2, 32; Ezra 2:59? How is tribal lineage determined going all the way back to Moses? You sai…[Read more]

@DesireTruth

Jesus did not have a biological father.
Jesus’ tribal lineage is traced the same way the Tanakh traces tribal lineage in multiple cases: – biologically through Mary (David → Nathan → Mary → Jesus) – legally through Joseph (David → Solomon → Joseph → Jesus) – divinely through God’s appointment (Psalm 2; Psalm 110)

@Lightenup,

I didn’t ask about messianic references, as we’ll most likely agree on a fair number of them; I asked to PROVE the Jesus IS the Messiah and to begin with the birth narrative.

Who is the Jesus’ biological father and does this fit with what G-d said concerning tribal lineage and sons being counted with their fathers house (Num 1:2, 18,…[Read more]

@DesireTruth

Starting with this: “What does the Tanakh actually say about the Messiah?”

Let’s use only what the Tanakh itself says, not later rabbinic expectations, not Christian tradition, and not assumptions imported from either side.

If we are going to evaluate whether Jesus fulfills the Tanakh, we must first identify what the Tanakh act…[Read more]

@Lightenup,

Prove the Jesus is the Messiah! If that cannot be established, everything thing we are talking about is a waste of time. If the Jesus isn’t the Messiah, who cares what the unknown writer of Hebrews says or claims the Jesus is, or how it aligns or doesn’t align with the Tanakh, or if it fits a Messianic prophecy or not.

This takes us…[Read more]

@DesireTruth

You are now agreeing with the textual points but shifting everything back to one question: “Is Jesus the true Messiah?” That is fine, but you are skipping the necessary step that comes before that. Hebrews 1 is not trying to prove Jesus is the Messiah by quoting the Tanakh. Hebrews 1 is explaining who the Son is, assuming the mes…[Read more]

@Lightenup,

Point 1. I don’t disagree with at all; upon further study, Davidic kingship can be applied to mean Messianic. Now we roll back to my original question, is the Jesus the true Messiah and can this be applied to him.

Point 2. I agree with what you wrote, you articulated it better than I did; the main idea of what I said is that this c…[Read more]

@DesireTruth

You keep trying to change the subject from the actual question.

You asked:
“Does Hebrews chapter one claim all that is quoted from the Tanakh is applied to Jesus or not?”

Answer: Yes, Hebrews 1 applies those passages to the Son. That is explicit in the text.

Hebrews 1:1–2: God spoke through the prophets, but now has spoken in Hi…[Read more]

@Lightenup,

I can’t believe I allowed you suck me into this rabbit hole and away from what was originally said, stop wasting time; does Hebrews chapter one claim all that is quoted from the Tanakh is applied to the Jesus or not? If yes, then explain and support it with the Tanakh, not with the writings and musing of man; if no, then rip the b…[Read more]

@Keith

James 1:5 tells us that if we lack wisdom, we should ask God. With that in mind, would you be willing to sincerely ask God the Father whether His Son, Jesus, ever began to exist, or whether the Son has always existed in some manner? I am not asking you to accept my view—only to ask the Father directly and be open to whatever He shows you.

The writings about Jerome says he didnt like the sepyuagint and switched to a corrupted latin version to translate the OT. That is where i am that i am came from. From Hebrew it translates-i will be what i will be. But to mislead because Jesus said i am( he lived before Abraham) Catholicism used i am that i am to mislead.

Lightenup–The Father created his only begotten son-The Hebrew word-possessed at Prov 8:22 means created in Hebrew. = The firstborn of all creation-false religions twist these facts because it exposes them as false. Only a HE created, not a we.( Gen 1:27-Prov 8:27-28)-Gods master worker(Jesus) is the builder not the creator.

@DesireTruth
In response to post #948121

You still haven’t engaged the actual evidence.
You’re reacting to translations and modern opinions, not to the manuscripts, not to the pre‑Christian Jewish sources, and not to the logic of Hebrews itself.

Let’s go point by point.

————————————————————
1. SEPTUAG…[Read more]

@Lightenup,

In response to post 948112

No, I’m reading the words written and the words written, don’t match…can’t have the 60+ different interpretations in front of me at all times. I’m comparing your translation of choice (NASB) to the Jewish Study Bible. If you need to justify your belief by using a translation that has fallen into obscuri…[Read more]

@Keith,

Desire truth. Psalm 45:7 did not call Jesus Elohim, It stated that he has an Elohim( God)

“You love justice and hate evil. For this reason God, your God has anointed you with the oil of joy, elevating you above your companions.”

Who is the “you” that is being anointed? The Jesus??? If so, you’re going have to tell me when the Jesus is…[Read more]

@Lightenup,

In response to post 948115, would you like some cheese with your whine?

When you answer every question I ask, then you’ll have grounds to stand on to lecture me! Besides, does reading and comprehension fail you? I originally stated “I initially started a long response to what you said, but abandoned it.” What part of that do you N…[Read more]

@Keith

You said this

“So The true God=Jehovah gave Jesus(Word) authority. If Jesus were God he would already have had the authority.”

If within the unity of Jehovah there is one God and one Lord who are a father and son, then one can expect that the son would be perfectly under the authority of the father if it were a perfect father/son rel…[Read more]

Desire truth. Psalm 45:7 did not call Jesus Elohim, It stated that he has an Elohim( God)

Jesus isn’t any kind of God. Small g god carries the meaning-has godlike qualities, it is not calling that one God as 2 Cor 4:4 plainly shows when satan is called god.