Was Jesus Jewish Messiah – What does the Hebrew Bible really say?

[Proclaimer]

The soul that sins shall die

Have I any pleasure in the death of the wicked, says the Lord God, and not rather that they should turn from their ways and live?

Amen.

Yet you say, “The way of the Lord is unfair.” Hear now, O house of Israel: Is my way unfair? Is it not your ways that are unfair?

Amen.

 Again, when the wicked turn away from the wickedness they have committed and do what is lawful and right, they shall save their life.

Amen.

Yet the house of Israel says, “The way of the Lord is unfair.” O house of Israel, are my ways unfair? Is it not your ways that are unfair? 30 Therefore I will judge you, O house of Israel, all of you according to your ways, says the Lord God. Repent and turn from all your transgressions; otherwise iniquity will be your ruin.

Amen.

For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone, says the Lord God. Turn, then, and live.

Amen.

20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

21 But if the wicked will turn from all his sins that he hath committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die.

22 All his transgressions that he hath committed, they shall not be mentioned unto him: in his righteousness that he hath done he shall live.

23 Have I any pleasure at all that the wicked should die? saith the Lord God: and not that he should return from his ways, and live?

24 But when the righteous turneth away from his righteousness, and committeth iniquity, and doeth according to all the abominations that the wicked man doeth, shall he live? All his righteousness that he hath done shall not be mentioned: in his trespass that he hath trespassed, and in his sin that he hath sinned, in them shall he die.’

Have you sinned gadam?

How will you be saved?

What is your hope?

[gadam123]

The messiah came.

You are at least 2000 years behind the plan.

First the law then grace.

You have rejected grace.

Hi Proclaimer, thanks for your replies to my posts and also conveying ‘Amen’ to my comments on Ezekiel 18.

But I am not agreeing with your logics of the so called ‘first Law then Grace’. It was purely the interpretation of Paul then by his followers. Grace is always there in the Torah and the Hebrew Bible and is not a new invention or secret revelation by the NT writers. Please read the following;

Gen 6:8

 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the Lord.

Gen 39:21

But the Lord was with Joseph and showed him mercy, and He gave[a] him favor in the sight of the keeper of the prison.

Ex 34:6

And the Lord passed before him and proclaimed, “The Lord, the Lord God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abounding in goodness and truth

Deut 4:31

(for the Lord your God is a merciful God), He will not forsake you nor destroy you, nor forget the covenant of your fathers which He swore to them.

Ps 62:12

Also to You, O Lord, belongs mercy;
For You [a]render to each one according to his work.

Ps 52:8

But I am like a green olive tree in the house of God;
I trust in the mercy of God forever and ever.

Ps 86:5

For You, Lord, are good, and ready to forgive,
And abundant in mercy to all those who call upon You.

Ps 145: 8-9

8 The Lord is gracious and full of compassion,
Slow to anger and great in mercy.
9 The Lord is good to all,
And His tender mercies are over all His works.

So the list goes on….

[gadam123]

Have you sinned gadam?

How will you be saved?

What is your hope?

Again you are struck at the NT’s strange ideas of Vicarious Atonement. Then your ‘Amen’ to Ezek 18 is meaningless.

[gadam123]

Please see this Video on Blood Atonement…

[gadam123]

This is not personal but is about the collective. If you could be forgiven for all sin, then why the need for the shedding of blood to cover sin in the OT?

The soul that sins will still die. The price of sin is death. And so it is we die. All the while, God can still forgive a nation. But death remains in the end for each person.

If prayer is all it takes to avoid death, then why does anyone need the messiah? Why is their even the notion of a messiah in the OT.

Hi Proclaimer, I have already posted much on the Blood Atonement for sin. Please go through the video I have posted above for more details. Hebrew Messiah was never meant for Vicarious Atonement for sins as claimed by Christianity.

[GeneBalthrop]

ADAM……this is what it actually says in Ex 34:6-7 ,

• • Ex 34: 6 -7 ….And the LORD passed by before him and proclaimed , The LORD, THE LORD God . merciful and gracious, long suffering. And abundant in goodness and truth,  (7) keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgressions and sin, And will “BY “NO MEANS ” CLEAR THE GUILTY” ; VISITING the iniquity of the Fathers upon the children’s children, unto the third and  fourth generation.

    That gives a little different light right ?  God does not forgive a person while they are still sinning,  only if they repent and stop doing it,  the Jews have never repented of what they did to Jesus. 

• Was it not the Jews that said,   Mat 27: 25….“then answered ‘ALL” the people, and said, His Blood be on us, “and” on our children.   ? ,  and it came to pass,  his blood did come upon them God kicked them out of their home land by the sword and sent a sword after them every went,  even to this very day they have no peace, only those who live in America and Britain  have any real peace .
• Adam please don’t say I hate the Jews because I don’t hate the Jews or anyone else either,  but I do hate some of the thing they and me myself have done in our pasts.  The Jews someday will acknowledge  the truth and weep bitterly for what they did to Our Lord Jesus Christ and will be forgiven.
• peace and love to you and yours Adam……….gene

[gadam123]

Question:
Not being a Jew or a “Jew for Jesus,” I am confused by this “blood sacrifice” argument between the two groups. I am trying to understand. I believe in Christ and am a Christian. I agree with your assessment that the offering the Lord truly wants is a broken heart and contrite spirit full of repentance. I also believe that “blood sacrifice” is not necessary for forgiveness as you have, with excellent Scriptural support, stated very well.

My question is related to your beliefs in the atoning nature of the Messiah. Regardless of whether Jesus is THE Messiah or not, I am surprised that the arguments you present diminish the significance of the Messiah’s role. My Jewish friends have always impressed me with their strong reverence for the Messiah and his role in their future. If I have read you correctly, you do not accept the concept of expiation. Please help me understand.

I am also confused with the use of Ezekiel 18:1-4, 19-23 as proof against the ability of one to atone for another’s sins.  It was simply as intended: A correction of those in that day who were propagating the idea that the sin of a father will rest upon his children. Ezekiel was dealing with those who teach that the sins of the father rest upon the children because the fall of Adam and Eve caused suffering on their children. It is clearly this false doctrine Ezekiel was trying to destroy.

Any clarification on these issues would be greatly appreciated and hopefully allow me to dispel confusion. I believe in asking the believer what he believes, not going to someone else and getting their “interpretation.” I hope you can appreciate this sincerity.

Answer:
I have been asked both of your questions by many Christians in the past, although not often with the earnestness and openness that comes across in your letter. You have essentially asked two questions, and I will address each separately.

Regarding your first question, the Bible is clear on the subject of the advent of the messiah. It should be noted, however, that although many sections throughout the Jewish Scriptures vividly describe how the world will be forever transformed with the arrival of the Messianic Age, very few discuss the messiah personally. The vast bulk of messianic Scripture in Tanach depicts the state of perfection that the world will achieve at the End of Days.

In contrast, parishioners pray to Jesus repeatedly, whom they venerate as God. How frequently is Jesus’ name mentioned during a typical Church service? Probably hundreds of times. Throughout the entire corpus of the Jewish Scriptures, there is not a single instance where we are encouraged to pray to or in the name of the messiah. This stunning, radical contradiction should inspire every parishioner to tremble, wonder, and seek out the truth.

The Tanach is clear that the significance of the messiah himself pales in comparison to the utopian age that his arrival will usher in. In a similar fashion, the status of Moses is overshadowed by the unprecedented events of the Exodus. Although Moses led the children of Israel out of Egypt, no Jew would even consider praying to or through Moses. Moses’ name is therefore virtually absent from the Passover Haggadah. Why is the lawgiver’s name missing from the Seder liturgy?

Because Judaism draws man’s eyes toward Heaven – the God of Israel. We are inspired by the saintly lives of great men like Abraham and Daniel, but the notion of worshiping them would not cross our minds. We worship the God for whom they were willing to die.

The reason Judaism does not accept the Christian messiah is because Jesus did not fulfill a single messianic prophecy clearly outlined in the Jewish Scriptures. The following is an overview of the central messianic prophecies outlined in the Jewish Scriptures that both Judaism and Christianity agree are messianic:

World Peace
Isaiah 2:4
And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people; and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn of war any more.
Isaiah 11:6-8
The wolf also shall dwell with the lamb, and the leopard shall lie down with the kid; and the calf and the young lion and the fatling together. . . and the sucking child shall play on the hole of the cobra…
Universal Knowledge of God
Isaiah 11:9
…for the earth shall be full of the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the sea.
Jeremiah 31:33
No longer shall one teach his neighbor or shall one teach his brother, saying, “Know the Lord,” for they shall all know Me, from their smallest to their greatest,” says the Lord…
Zechariah 14:9
And the Lord shall be king over all the earth. In that day shall there be one Lord, and His name one.
Resurrection of the Dead
Isaiah 26:19
Thy dead men shall live, together with my dead body shall they arise. Awake and sing, ye that dwell in dust, for thy dew is as the dew of herbs, and the earth shall cast out the dead.
Daniel 12:2
And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.
Ezekiel 37:12-13
Therefore, prophesy and say to them, “So says the Lord God, ‘Lo! I open your graves and cause you to come up out of your graves as My people, and bring you home to the land of Israel. Then you shall know that I am the Lord, when I open your graves and lead you up out of your graves as My people.’”
Ingathering of Israel
Isaiah 43:5-6
I will bring thy seed from the east, and gather you from the west. I will say to the north, “Give up,” and to the south, “Keep not back, bring My sons from far, and My daughters from the ends of the earth. (see also, Jeremiah 16:15 23:3; Isaiah 11:12; Zechariah 10:6; Ezekiel 37:21-22)
Building of The Third Temple
Ezekiel 37:26-28
…and I will set My Sanctuary in the midst of them forevermore. My temple also shall be with them. Yes, I will be their God and they shall be My people. And the heathen shall know that I, the Lord, do sanctify Israel, when My sanctuary shall be in the midst of them forevermore. (See also 40-48; Isaiah 33:20)
Although fantastic messianic claims have been made by countless individuals and their enthusiastic followers throughout history, not one of these claimants fulfilled any one of the prophecies clearly outlined in the Jewish Scriptures.

When evaluating the claim of Jesus’ messiahship, it is clear that the very opposite events occurred during the period that the Christian religion emerged. For example, during this catastrophic epoch, the dead did not resurrect as Daniel and Isaiah prophesied. Quite the contrary, the Romans slaughtered many hundreds of thousands of Jews during this bitter century. The children of Israel were not gathered from the diaspora two thousand years ago. The Jewish people were exiled from their land and dispersed throughout the Roman Empire during this dark moment in history. Nor did the universal knowledge of God unfold as promised by the prophets Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Ezekiel. As a result of the horrific wars with Rome and the dispersion that followed, the knowledge of Torah and its observance decreased. No temple was built in Jerusalem during the first century. The Second Temple was destroyed in the year 70 C.E. – its remains, the Wailing Wall, wait with us till this day for the true redemption. Clearly, there is no relationship between what the Bible says about the messiah and what Christendom espouses about Jesus.

With regard to your second question, it is essential for you to understand that the Jewish people do not read their Bible as if it were a mere history book. Those teachings that are inscribed throughout the Jewish Scriptures were not only appropriate for the time they were recorded; rather, its prophecies are indispensable for all generations that would follow. Every edification and instruction of the Torah and the Prophets are as meaningful and timely today as they were the day they were first preached.

Scripture, therefore, provides few dates for reckoning Biblical chronology. While these dates do appear in certain passages in Tanach, one must be careful piecing the time periods together in order to stretch out a contiguous time line.

Moreover, the Bible is entirely silent on what had transpired over the course of many decades during the lives of men like Abraham and Moses. This does not suggest that Abraham did nothing spiritually valuable during those silent years. Rather, only those crucial events that provide eternal teachings and are relevant for all future generations were inscribed in the Bible.

Even the first Christians were well aware of this principle.

In II Timothy 3:16 Paul says, “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.” Bear in mind, at the time that II Timothy was written, the Christian Bible had not yet been written. Chronologically, the letters of Paul were among the earliest books in the New Testament. The author of this Pastoral Epistle was referring only to the Jewish Scriptures.

In the eighteenth chapter of Ezekiel, the prophet was teaching his people a fundamental Biblical principle: A righteous person cannot die vicariously for the sins of the wicked. This alien notion was condemned by Ezekiel. He taught that the belief that the innocent can suffer to atone for the sins of the wicked is pagan, and was to be purged from the mind of the Jewish people. This core tenet of Judaism is conveyed explicitly throughout the eighteenth chapter of the Book of Ezekiel. In verses 18:20-23, the prophet declares that true repentance alone washes the penitent clean of all iniquities; every one of his sins are forgiven in Heaven. This chapter is so clear and unambiguous, there can be no other reading of these passages. Blood-sacrifices or the veneration of a crucified messiah are not mentioned or even hinted throughout Ezekiel’s thorough and inspiring discourse on sin and atonement.

Ezekiel’s teaching is not novel. The Jewish people were warned throughout the Torah never to offer human sacrifices. When Moses offered to have his name removed from the Torah in exchange for the sin that the Jewish people had committed with the Golden Calf, the Almighty abruptly refused Moses’ offer. Moses, who was righteous with regard to the golden calf, could not suffer vicariously for the sin of the nation. Rather, only the soul that sinned would endure judgment.

As Ezekiel explains chapters later,

Say to them, ‘As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign Lord, I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn from their ways and live. Turn! Turn from your evil ways! Why will you die, O house of Israel?’ 12 “Therefore, son of man, say to your countrymen, ‘The righteousness of the righteous man will not save him when he disobeys, and the wickedness of the wicked man will not cause him to fall when he turns from it. The righteous man, if he sins, will not be allowed to live because of his former righteousness.’” (Ezekiel 33:11-12)
Regarding your comment on the sin in the Garden of Eden, the consequences of the fall of Adam and Eve are not to be appended to Ezekiel’s 18th chapter. The first iniquity is not mentioned in these passages. In fact, Ezekiel outlines many of the sins that the wicked routinely commit, and yet not one of them is eating from the forbidden Tree of Knowledge. On the contrary, all of the sins outlined in the eighteenth chapter of Ezekiel are those that were never committed in the Garden of Eden. As mentioned above, this monumental chapter is filled with fundamental principles of sin and atonement, and a vigorous rejection of the pagan belief in vicarious atonement.

Finally, I am puzzled by the fact that you have identified yourself as a Christian and yet at the end of your letter you refer to the teaching that the fall of Adam and Eve has affected and caused suffering to their future children as a doctrine that “Ezekiel was trying to destroy.” This comment surprises me because this is a foundational Christian doctrine.

The Church teaches that every person born into this world is infected with the stain of, and is spiritually lost as a result of the Original Sin. Accordingly, Christendom argues that man is incapable of achieving “salvation” through his own initiative. Man’s “totally depravity” is complete. His only hope of salvation is through the Cross. This is the cornerstone of Paul’s theology throughout his Epistles, especially in the Book of Romans.

I agree with your assessment that the doctrine of Original Sin is contrary to the teachings of the prophets. In fact, the Church’s doctrine of Original Sin and Total Depravity has no greater foe than the Prophet Ezekiel.

Thank you for your sincere questions. Happy Chanukah!

Yours,

Rabbi Tovia Singer

[Berean]

Gadam

In the eighteenth chapter of Ezekiel, the prophet taught his people a fundamental biblical principle: a righteous person cannot die vicariously for the sins of the wicked. This foreign notion was condemned by Ezekiel. He taught that the belief that the innocent can suffer to atone for the sins of the wicked is pagan and should be purged from the minds of the Jewish people.

ME

JESUS, BY TAKING CARE OF THE SINS OF WHOLE HUMANITY, WAS MADE SIN FOR US SO THAT WE BECOME “IN HIM” JUSTICE OF GOD.
HE IS “SACRIFICIAL LAMB” FOR THE SINS OF THE WHOLE WORLD, WHO ONLY CAN TAKE AWAY THE SINS OF THE WORLD.
Romans 8
There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus, who walk not according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit.
[2] For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus has made me free from the law of sin and death.
[3] For WHAT THE LAW COULD NOT DO, was that it was weak in the flesh,

God sending his own Son 

in the image of the flesh of sin, and for sin,

condemned sin in flesh : 

[4] That the righteousness of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh, but according to the Spirit. 

[5] For those who are according to the flesh are concerned about the things of the flesh; but those who are after the Spirit the things of the Spirit.
[6] For to be carnal is death; but to have a spiritual spirit is life and peace.
[7] Because the carnal spirit is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, nor can it be.
[8] So therefore, those who are in the flesh cannot please God.

[Proclaimer]

Hi Proclaimer, I have already posted much on the Blood Atonement for sin. Please go through the video I have posted above for more details. Hebrew Messiah was never meant for Vicarious Atonement for sins as claimed by Christianity.

I don’t need to watch a whole video on this. It’s simple to grasp. The OT sacrificial lamb points to the Lamb of God.

A classic case of NT fulfilling OT.

You are free to deal with your own sin in any way you want. But I trust in the Lamb of God.

[gadam123]

Supposed Messianic Prophecies of Early Date

…As we begin with the passage which from early times has been regarded as the oldest Messianic prophecy, namely Gen. 3: 15, which refers to the offspring of the woman, who will bruise the serpent’s head with his heel. It is now generally admitted by those who adopt the historical approach to theology that there is no allusion here to the Devil or to Christ as ‘ born of woman’, but that it is a quite general statement about mankind, and serpents, and the struggle between them which continues as long as the earth exists. The poisonous serpent strikes at man’s foot whenever he is unfortunate enough to come too near to it; and always and everywhere man tries to crush the serpent’s head when he has the chance. What needs to be said of the royal psalms in this connexion will be reserved for later discussion. They do not speak of a future, much less an eschatological, Messiah, but of the contemporary, earthly king of David’s line, who has just been enthroned. The poet-prophet addresses him as ‘my lord’ (Ps. 110: 1), and proclaims to him Yahweh’s oracle about his future as king (Ps. 2). Or the king is present in the temple and takes part in the cultic acts, presenting his offerings (Ps. 20), receiving the blessings and intercessory prayers of the people (Pss. 20; 21; 72), or himself offering his psalms of lamentation and prayers for help (Pss. 28; 63), his thank-offerings and psalms of thanksgiving (Ps. 18), or registering his promise or ‘charter’ before the face of Yahweh (Ps. 91).

In connexion with the royal psalms we may also refer to those other psalms in which traditional theology, sometimes even since the days of the primitive Church, has found prophecies of Christ, for instance Ps. 22 with its description of the suffering of the worshipper. Of this and other similar psalms it must be said that if they may be applied to Christ at all, it is by typological interpretation and not because they are directly Christological or Messianic prophecies. That is to say that in the thought of the poet, the worshipper, and his contemporaries they have an immediate, contemporary reference; they are in fact not prophecies but prayers, issuing from a real, contemporary situation, that of the poet or the worshipper himself; and they express what he then felt, and thought, and said. The fact that the worshipper is in many instances a historical king of Israel does not alter the fundamental fact that the psalms are not prophecies but prayers with contemporary reference. But the words of these psalms have proved to be more enduring and far-reaching. So powerful are they in faith and in realism that in the fullness of time they could give expression to the situation and the achievement of Jesus, His soul’s conflict, His trust in God, His cry of distress, His fellowship with His brethren. The early Christian community therefore regarded them as a perfectly valid expression for what they themselves had witnessed in their Lord and Master. The worshippers of ancient times became ‘types’ prefiguring Christ. The words of the psalms found their true realization and fulfilment in Jesus Himself. In an account of the history of the Messianic concept all these psalms must be considered again in the appropriate context as sources or documents concerning the thoughts about the Messiah which were current in the Christian community. But of the origin and earliest history of the Messianic idea they can tell us nothing; for, in the thought and feeling of the poet and those for whom he wrote, they referred not to the Messiah but to the conditions of their own time.

Nor is any Messianic prophecy intended by the phrase in the lay of Balaam about the ‘star’ and ‘sceptre’, or rather ‘comet’, which ‘shall rise out of Israel, and shatter the temples of Moab and the skulls of the children of Sheth’ (Num. 24:17). Both this and the other older Balaam lay are intended as poems in honour of Israel, and are put into the mouth of the ancient, legendary Aramean seer and sage, Balaam. They tell of Israel’s greatness, good fortune, and power, and of her supremacy over the other Canaanite peoples, among whom are mentioned Amalek, Moab, the children of Ammon, and Edom. It is in keeping with the character and style of this type of poetry that the poems are put into the mouth of a sage of former days, and that they take the form of a blessing (or, sometimes, of a curse) which accounts for the destiny of the people in question, whether it be good fortune or ill. Thus, because of their character, they take the form of prophecy from ancient times; but in fact it is the poet’s own time or the immediate past that they thus describe. In this lay there is also an allusion (one might almost say inevitably) to David, who laid the foundation of Israel’s supremacy in Canaan, and subjected Edom, Moab, and Ammon to Israel. It is to David that the poet refers when he speaks of the ‘star’ and ‘comet’ (E.VV. ‘sceptre’) which the ancient seer ‘sees, but not now; beholds, but not nigh’.

It is in much the same way that we must interpret the expression in the Blessing of Jacob1 about ‘Shiloh’ or ‘the ruler’ of Judah (Gen. 49: 10), who is to make Judah the ruling tribe among the children of Israel, and to whom the sceptre will always belong. The reference is to David, who made Judah the ruling tribe, and whose house thus won an enduring right to the throne in Israel All those scholars (such as Gressmann and Sellin) who have sought to maintain that eschatology and the idea of the Messiah were ancient in Israel admit frankly that the royal psalms and the other passages mentioned above must be interpreted in historical terms. But they maintain that these poems nevertheless presuppose the existence in Israel of a conception of the Messiah, since it is in accordance with the Messianic pattern that they describe and extol David and the other historical kings, who are depicted more or less as the realization of the Messianic hope, or as kings who have attained or will attain to the heights of the Messianic ideal.

In the texts themselves there is simply no foundation for this theory; and no measure of probability can be claimed for it on exegetical grounds. Gressmann argues as follows: the descriptions of kings in the Psalter include not only contemporary historical references, but also many superhuman, mythical traits which must be derived not from the earthly ruler, but from a mythical, heavenly figure. In reply to this it may first be observed that even if the figure had traits which had to be explained as borrowings from a mythical figure, from a deity of some sort, it would not necessarily follow that this figure was an eschatological Messiah, or that the king in question was thought of as a Messiah because of his borrowed divine plumes. In the second place, the strongly mythical, superhuman colouring is no proof of the existence of any other figure from which it might have been de-rived for the royal portraits in the psalms. The same extravagant and celestial language is applied by Babylonian and Egyptian poets to their kings; and their descriptions are not drawn from any Messiah, for these peoples had neither eschatology nor a Messiah . A comparison with the more or less divine kings of other peoples ought to make it immediately clear that the mythical traits have not been borrowed from any quarter. As we shall see below, they belong to the oriental conception of the king, simply because he was a ‘divine king’, a superhuman being, a superman endowed with abnormal gifts and power, precisely what oriental peoples meant by a ‘god’: a being with super-human power or ‘mana’. The mythical traits and colouring in the portrait of the king are derived from the divine realm, because that is where the king belongs: he has faculties, characteristics, and endowments which ancient man could express only by mythical ideas and in mythical terms. They belong to the king, not because he is a Messiah, but simply because he is an oriental king.

It is therefore bad scientific method to do as Gressmann, Sellin, and others have done, and to base our inquiry into the origin of the conception of the Messiah on an assumed oriental Messianic theology of which we know nothing, but which is supposed to have influenced the Psalmists and other royal bards. On the other hand, there are good grounds for the connexion (to which Gunkel and Gressmann drew attention) between the royal psalms and the oriental conceptions of kingship, and for the prominence given to this idea in recent study. There is, in fact, a close connexion between the idea of the Messiah and the ancient Israelite conceptions of the king and kingship, which in turn are closely linked with the general oriental idea of the king….(taken from the book “He that Cometh” by Sigmund Mowinckel)

[Proclaimer]

Personally speaking gadam, I do not read long posts.

I usually read posts that make a single point and will often reply to that if warranted.

That makes it more of a conversation rather than who can write the best essay.

For this reason, I rarely read posts from Jodi and Carmel too.

Long posts are hard to deal with because to debunk each point takes forever.

So I usually read till I come across what I think is the first error and then debate that one error.

I will do this now.

[Proclaimer]

…As we begin with the passage which from early times has been regarded as the oldest Messianic prophecy, namely Gen. 3: 15, which refers to the offspring of the woman, who will bruise the serpent’s head with his heel. It is now generally admitted by those who adopt the historical approach to theology that there is no allusion here to the Devil or to Christ as ‘ born of woman’, but that it is a quite general statement about mankind, and serpents, and the struggle between them which continues as long as the earth exists.

Well I didn’t have to read much before a reply was needed. Here goes.

If this is ONLY a general statement, then why is it there?

Perhaps because it is pointing to something specific?

Often general statements when mentioned in a context are pointing to something.

I guess you never thought that one through.

I might say, “you reap what you sow” which is a general statement.

But if I said that in the context of a person who was for example treating his partner in a bad way, then that would allude to something bad happening to you based on your bad actions. It could for example result in your partner leaving you or your partner doing something bad to you directly. Perhaps another person years later will do the same thing to you. Who knows, but the point is the general saying is being applied to a specific scenario. So we have just moved from general to specific or at least to ‘more specific’.

I think before you post long speeches in an attempt to dazzle or baffle people, you probably should check these basic things out first. I didn’t get very far in your post before a correction was warranted.

[Proclaimer]

Adam please don’t say I hate the Jews because I don’t hate the Jews or anyone else either

Yes, I disagree with that statement too. I don’t believe for one minute you hate Jews. I think I would have picked that up by now since you have been posting here for years.

[gadam123]

I think before you post long speeches in an attempt to dazzle or baffle people, you probably should check these basic things out first. I didn’t get very far in your post before a correction was warranted.

Hi Proclaimer, I too know the statement but the historians don’t believe what you and I believe and  they are neutral people. So they see the religious stories as myths if they are not able to prove them as per historical methods. The stories of creation as per the Genesis chap 1 & 2 can not be proved as historical happenings. Please read my  post fully as it was taken from a famous book “He That Cometh: The Messiah Concept in the Old Testament and Later Judaism” by Sigmund Mowinckel.

[Proclaimer]

Hi Proclaimer, I too know the statement but the historians don’t believe what you and I believe and  they are neutral people. So they see the religious stories as myths if they are not able to prove them as per historical methods.

At that time Jesus answered and said, “I thank Thee, O Father, Lord of Heaven and earth, because Thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes. – Jesus Christ

&

Let no one deceive himself. If any of you thinks he is wise in this age, he should become a fool, so that he may become wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God’s sight. As it is written: “He catches the wise in their craftiness.” And again, “The Lord knows that the thoughts of the wise are futile.” – Paul

&

The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit. – Paul

[gadam123]

At that time Jesus answered and said, “I thank Thee, O Father, Lord of Heaven and earth, because Thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes. – Jesus Christ

&

Let no one deceive himself. If any of you thinks he is wise in this age, he should become a fool, so that he may become wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness in God’s sight. As it is written: “He catches the wise in their craftiness.” And again, “The Lord knows that the thoughts of the wise are futile.” – Paul

&

The person without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God but considers them foolishness, and cannot understand them because they are discerned only through the Spirit. – Paul

Sorry to comment on your post above. The above verses quoted by you are the opinions of the NT writers and are most religious. I was discussing on the historical investigations on the concept of Messiah in the Hebrew Bible. It is nothing to do with spiritual beliefs and convictions here. Hope you will understand my posts.

[GeneBalthrop]

Adam…..if God caused it to be done, it is Spiritually   done , God is a Spirit.  Yes even in the Old Testament , the blood on the Door posts of that innocent Lamb , that caused the death angel to pass over that House ,, was and is equal to the Blood of God’s Lamb, God shed for us, and we apply that Blood to the door posts of our hearts, in belief as they did in belief, and we then have past from eternal judgement,  to life, exactly as Jesus himself said.

Adam the Old Testament is a spiritually written book, what makes you think it is not? ,  there is no difference between the books, they both are full of Spiritually written things. and yes they both have some translation problems I agree,  but over all they both are fairly accurate, and both are spiritually driven and written books.   IMO

Peace and love to you and yours……….gene

[gadam123]

Adam the Old Testament is a spiritually written book, what makes you think it is not? ,  there is no difference between the books, they both are full of Spiritually written things. and yes they both have some translation problems I agree,  but over all they both are fairly accurate, and both are spiritually driven and written books.   IMO

Sorry Brother if my post meant that way. I am not questioning any spiritual meaning of the Bible here. That depends on individual convictions and beliefs.

[Jodi]

Hi Adam,

YOU:

B. Suffering Servant:
Christianity claims that Isaiah chapter 53 refers to Jesus, as the “suffering servant.”

In actuality, Isaiah 53 directly follows the theme of chapter 52, describing the exile and redemption of the Jewish people. The prophecies are written in the singular form because the Jews (“Israel”) are regarded as one unit. Throughout Jewish scripture, Israel is repeatedly called, in the singular, the “Servant of God” (see Isaiah 43:8). In fact, Isaiah states no less than 11 times in the chapters prior to 53 that the Servant of God is Israel.

When read correctly, Isaiah 53 clearly [and ironically] refers to the Jewish people being “bruised, crushed and as sheep brought to slaughter” at the hands of the nations of the world. These descriptions are used throughout Jewish scripture to graphically describe the suffering of the Jewish people (see Psalm 44).

Isaiah 53 concludes that when the Jewish people are redeemed, the nations will recognize and accept responsibility for the inordinate suffering and death of the Jews.

ME:

Isaiah 53:8 He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken. 9 And he made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth. 10 Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise him; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make his soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.

I am not seeing how this aligns with what you are saying.

“he” represents Israel you say,

Israel was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for Israel was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was Israel stricken. And Israel made his grave with the wicked, and with the rich in his death; because he had done no violence, neither was any deceit in his mouth. Yet it pleased the LORD to bruise Israel; he hath put him to grief: when thou shalt make Israel’s soul an offering for sin, he shall see his seed, he shall prolong his days, and the pleasure of the LORD shall prosper in his hand.

On one hand Israel is a transgressor and on the other hand he had done no violence and neither was there any deceit in Israel’s mouth?

Israel’s soul is an offering for sin?

[Proclaimer]

Sorry to comment on your post above. The above verses quoted by you are the opinions of the NT writers and are most religious. I was discussing on the historical investigations on the concept of Messiah in the Hebrew Bible. It is nothing to do with spiritual beliefs and convictions here. Hope you will understand my posts.

It is relevant because it explains your rejection. Of course we can still discuss anyway knowing that you will reject it regardless.

[Author]

Posts