Search Members

[DesireTruth]

@Proclaimer,

Of course Hebrew names have a meaning behind them, but what does that have to do with the fact the Jesus was NOT named Immanuel as was supposedly prophesied about him in Isa 7:14? The passage chrisianity clings to every christmas claiming his mother was impregnated by G-d and she was a “virgin”, making the Jesus a demigod…so Greek and Roman!

The point is the Jesus DIDN’T fulfill Isa 7:14 because he wasn’t name Immanuel. Logically, the Isaiah passage CANNOT be attributed to the Jesus, thus making the book of Matthew a lie! Or is there an acceptable number of lies that can be in the NT and still be called the “inspired word of G-d”?

It’s amazing what happens when one starts studying and not blindly following what one is told is truth…verify everything!

[DesireTruth]

@Berean,

She will give birth to a son, and you are to name him Jesus, because he will save the people from their sins. (Matthew 1:21)

You copy/paste this passage from your “prophetess” and I have a few questions concerning it. I thought this child was to be named “Immanuel” (Isa 7:14) and now his name is “the Jesus.” Then your prophetess miss quotes the actual passages saying “he will save the people” when what is actually written is “ he will save his people” and who are “his people”…hint, the Jesus was Jewish…and on a side note, didn’t the Jesus say “I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” Where does the none Jew factor into the task of the Jesus? Finally, and most importantly, where does it say The Messiah was to “save people from their sins” (this would come from the prophets) and later we can find salvation/everlasting life for just “believing” in him (John 3:16)? Even I believe the Jesus was a real historical person. Or am I suppose to “believe” he was a human sacrifice, a type of sacrifice G-d called an abomination, and that thru this “sacrifice” ones sins are forgiven?  However, to be a real sacrifice, doesn’t it have to be done on the alter in the Temple?

[DesireTruth]

@Lightenup,

So you wholly rely on the interpretations of man…interesting!

When are you going to read and study what G-d said or do the interpretations of man supersede G-d’s words?

[DesireTruth]

@Proclaimer,

Is this another drive by commentary or will you engage in a conversation?

Your response comes from my comment to Lightenup where he says the Tanakh DOESN’T say The Messiah is to come twice and your response is “logic”?!??! Please enlighten me! The only “logic” needed is what the Tanakh says.

The Tanakh says The Messiah is to be a descendant of David and Solomon – the Jesus fails; it says The Messiah will gather the Jewish people from exile and return them to Israel, but the Jesus says he’s come to divide – another fail; it says The Messiah will rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem, but it was standing while he was alive – fail again. It says The Messiah will rule at a time when the Jewish people will observe G-d’s commandments and we seem to be still waiting for that one – another the Jesus fail; The Messiah will rule at a time when all people will come to acknowledge and serve one G-d, it says “all people” not a limited number that “believe” in the Jesus and we’re still waiting – big the Jesus fail.

These are some of the actions The Messiah will do when he comes and the Jesus did none of them while he was here; in order for the christian to explain all these failures away, they claim he will do them when he returns and where does the Jesus ever say he will do these things? Never mind the time frame that he said he would return in (Matthew 24; Rev 1 & 22).

Let’s “logically” look at the millennial reign when the Jesus rules, but many will be deceived by Satan at the end and that’s “logical” to you? Sounds like the Jesus did a poor job and where is the NT bible that explains this ending, did it get lost; did the Jesus NOT warn them of this ending? And you want to talk “logic”?

God brings the law and the law condemns. God brings grace and forgives those who are repentant.

Where does G-d say the “law condemns”? The “law” given at Mnt Sinai was a set of instructions on how the Israeli nation was to live in regards to each other and other people. These instructions were to set them apart from other nations. Do we read the same bible? To say the “law condemns” is a NT teaching and is a lie from the great liar Paul. Your next statement is 100% true; it is from G-d’s grace and mercy that he forgives when one turn from their wickedness, HE even says HE’LL remember it no more (remember Jonah and Nineveh). Which makes your next statement extremely odd:

God works through one flock, the Jews, and they have the law. God works through another flock, the Church, and they have grace.

So the Jews only have the “law” and grace is only reserved today for the “church”?!?! Again, are we reading from the same bible? I think what it is, the “church” spends to much time in the NT philosophizing and NOT enough time reading and studying what G-d actually said in the first half of the bible. I’ve said this before, the “church” follows Paul and NOT the Jesus; what Paul taught and what the Jesus taught clash, IF one were to study what each said.

God is sovereign. He can unravel his plan as he sees fit.

Absolutely! HE is the creator of all things, seen and unseen and HE is free to do as HE wishes, no dispute; however, HE has already revealed HIS plan and all you have to do is read the Tanakh.

[DesireTruth]

@Lightenup,

How have I spoken “rudely” to you; please provide examples. To say you have given “many hours of thoughtful responses”… REALLY!! you’ve peddled what you have been taught (the irony is, it’s mostly the same thing I was taught); I want truth! You’ve run from virtually every question I’ve asked.

To the “general reader”, if you can’t support what you believe, why do you believe it? Verify everything you have been told is truth; and you will find it. This is coming from someone who was in christianity for 40 years, before I began testing what I was told and began verifying it against the Tanakh (aka Old Testament), read it in its context, and if it doesn’t match, it’s a lie!

To say you are choosing to not continue responding to me simply says you can’t and so you go after those you can! That sounds like weakness to attack those you feel are intellectually inferior to you; which means what???? What you’re really saying is you can’t support the Jesus as The Messiah; which I find hilarious!!! Run Forest, RUN!!

Good luck to you and enjoy the rapture that will never happen. Continue waiting for the Jesus to return; may want to read with comprehension Matt 24 where the Jesus says he’ll return after the destruction of the Temple and Revelation 1:1,3; 22:6,7,12,20 where the Jesus says he is coming soon. Is 2000 years later “soon” to you? Even Peter was expecting the Jesus to return after the destruction of the Temple in his first epistle and when he didn’t changed his tune is his second (a year is but a thousand years, and a thousand years is but a day to G-d). Time to wake up!!

P.S. I will continue to responsed to lies in the hopes of correcting them or at least being able to offer an opposing view to create a dialog for those who are genuinely seeking.

[DesireTruth]

@lightenup,

You speak of “veils” blinding people from seeing the truth; yet, you haven’t provided any proof the Jesus is THE Messiah (parachuting onto a verse, copy/paste theology, and misinterpreting the Tanakh doesn’t count as proof). Do you know who THE Messiah will be or what he will do according to the Tanakh? If the Jesus’ life per the NT doesn’t match what the Tanakh says about THE Messiah, can the Jesus be THE Messiah? Simple questions; tough answers!

Your focus is entirely on the Jesus to the point you can’t see the obvious written in front of you (veils) and now you’re telling others they’re wrong; yet you can’t support what you believe! You ran from our conversation and refused to answer the questions or support what you believe is truth…is it that hard? Then you go after Keith; and the moment you struck up this “conversation” with him, I knew exactly where it was going. Pretend to be nice, like you want to be besties, and in a moment turn into an attack dog.

Now you turn to Berean; claiming what he believes is false because he observes the Sabbath, (didn’t the Jesus observe the Sabbath and what does “lord of the sabbath” really mean and what about the world passing away before the law does? Crazy thoughts and questions…) but somehow what you believe is the only truth. Bottom line is everyone argues over what their religion tells them is truth, but does anyone verify what they’re peddling and is it supported by the Tanakh? I think most here won’t say what their religion is because of fear. I respect both Berean and Keith for having the fortitude to take a stand and proudly say what faith they belong to; while everyone else seems to hid behind their keyboard and others claiming they don’t belong to a faith…you do! Are you ashamed of your faith or is the fear of being critiqued the reason you won’t say what religion you belong to?

I’m still waiting to continue our conversation on how the Jesus can be The Messiah when he isn’t a biological descendant of David AND Solomon? Contrary to what you believe and no amount of dancing around the subject or the use of multiple justifications you have learned can change the FACT The Messiah will be from the house of David thru Solomon…biologically. Nowhere does G-d say HE would impregnate a woman. HE did say HE would establish this son of David’s kingdom and make his dynasty permanent. We get the name of this son in I Chron 22:9, “Indeed, Solomon will be his name.” The Jesus doesn’t have an earthly daddy and is therefore not in the line of David according to how the Jewish people track ancestry. Once you see it, you can NEVER unsee it and once that “veil” thingy you accuse others of suffering from is removed, christianity begins to fall apart.

[DesireTruth]

@Keith,

Did you do as I said and go back a few pages where this discussion began? Mary has NOTHING to do with lineage and Ezra explains that; why did the men tell their foreign wives and children to go away? Jewishness is maternal and comes from the mother, NOT the father. Never mind the fact the Luke account goes thru David’s son Nathan and NOT Solomon…fail! Tribal lineage is paternal and comes from the father; we find this in Numbers 1 & 2 where a census is taken and the sons are counted with their father’s house. This has NOT changed in three millennia as it is still used today to determine tribal lineage.

Joseph’s lineage runs thru Jeconiah and he was “cursed” (G-d removed his kingship) and was counted as childless; so any kingship coming thru Jeconiah wouldn’t have counted. Both birth accounts fail, rendering the Jesus as a false messiah. Never mind the fact the Jesus told his disciples he would return in their generation and didn’t (Matt 24…read it!); false messiah!

When will people start verifying what they have been told is truth? Stop studying the Greek Testament and start studying the Tanakh. Remove you Jesus Goggles so you can see the truth!

[DesireTruth]

@Keith,

The passage you are quoting is from Psalm 45:

6 Your throne, O God, is permanent. The scepter of your kingdom is a scepter of justice. 7 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.

This Psalm is a romantic poem celebrating the Davidic king’s marriage to a lovely princess; when did the Jesus get married? The psalmist praises the king for his military prowess and commitment to justice; when did the Jesus show his military might and justly rule? The psalmist continues by urging the bride to be loyal to the king and says the marriage will be blessed with royal offspring; how exactly does this apply to the Jesus? Now that we understand what the Psalm is about; did the unknown writer of Hebrews apply the passage from Psalm 45 correctly?

What the writer did was copy and paste a passage about a Davidic king and misapplied it to the Jesus. Context of what is written is important; this is why christianity, when it is studied and not just believed, begins to fall apart. Can you substantiate the passages quoted from the Tanakh in Hebrews chapter one are speaking of the Jesus and their original context was intended to be applied to the Jesus?

You did say something interesting, “God anointed Jesus with the oil of exultation, more than his partners (angels)”; the angels were the Jesus’ “partners”, they were his equal?!?!

I do find it hilarious when the christian thought or doctrine is challenged, none can support their answer. The typical response is ignore, deflect, or move the goal post to something else. Prove the Jesus is The Messiah! Verify everything!! Why do you believe what you believe; if you can’t support it, why believe it?

[DesireTruth]

To the general reader,

Let’s have a quick lesson in truth!

This discussion has circled around one repeated claim: that Jesus cannot be the Messiah because “the Messiah must have a biological father from Solomon’s line.” The problem is that this requirement is not found anywhere in the Tanakh. It is an assumption being treated as a divine rule.

This is quoted from Lightenup and since he obviously didn’t read the passages I gave him that confirm The Messiah is to be a biological descendant of David AND Solomon, I give you the passage that explicitly states The Messiah MUST come thru Solomon, I Chron 17:10-15:

“I declare to you that the LORD will build a dynastic house for you! 11 When the time comes for you to die, I will raise up your descendant, one of your own sons, to succeed you, and I will establish his kingdom. 12 He will build me a house, and I will make his dynasty permanent. 13 I will become his father and he will become my son. I will never withhold my loyal love from him, as I withheld it from the one who ruled before you. 14 I will put him in permanent charge of my house and my kingdom; his dynasty will be permanent.” 15 Nathan told David all these words that were revealed to him.

G-d tells David after he dies HE will raise up one of his sons to succeed him; when HE does, G-d will establish this sons kingdom; this son will build a house (temple) for G-d; G-d will make his dynasty permanent (did we catch that?!?!); G-d will become his father and this son will become G-d’s son (the writer of Hebrews misapplies this to the Jesus when it was said of Solomon – we’ll get there momentarily to the name of this son of David); and G-d says this dynasty will be permanent, where we get the idea The Messiah will come. The pronoun “his” in this passage refers to the son of David and no one else and who is this son?

To find out who this son is we must read I Chron 22:7-10:

7 David said to Solomon: My son, I really wanted to build a temple to honor the LORD my God. 8 But the LORD said to me: ‘You have spilled a great deal of blood and fought many battles. You must not build a temple to honor me, for you have spilled a great deal of blood on the ground before me. 9 Look, you will have a son, who will be a peaceful man. I will give him rest from all his enemies on every side. Indeed, Solomon will be his name; I will give Israel peace and quiet during his reign. 10 He will build a temple to honor me; he will become my son, and I will become his father. I will grant to his dynasty permanent rule over Israel.’

Here we read basically the same words from chapter 17 but now we get a name of this son – Solomon. Solomon’s dynasty will be established permanently and therefore The Messiah MUST be a biological descendant of Solomon because G-d said HE would grant to his dynasty permanent rule over Israel. There is no adoption spoken of or passing on “legal rights” of the kingship (which still hasn’t been substantiated by a certain someone), and it can’t be thru Nathan as the Luke writes in his gospel.

Now we discover this certain someone doesn’t have the fortitude to continue on discovering how the Jesus fails to be the true Messiah as we come to our third point, “The Messiah will gather the Jewish people from exile and return them to Israel.”

[DesireTruth]

@Berean,

Proverbs 30 does?!?!?

We’ve been over this passage and the answer is G-d is the only who has done all of these things; however the question is rhetorical and obviously doesn’t need and answer. Even Agur, who claims to be the dumbest of the dumb, knows this…and you don’t??!?

“Who has ascended into heaven, and then descended?
…gathered up the winds in his fists?
…bound up the waters in his cloak?
…established all the ends of the earth?

The passage in summary, since you have forgotten, is Agur asking what man has done all these things and if there is a man who has, what is the name of their son. NOTHING ABOUT THE JESUS ANYWHERE!!! Christianity has made all this up.

Nice try, but the Jesus isn’t The Messiah; unless you have proof he descended from Solomon because what i read in the NT is the Jesus’ daddy is the spirit and the spirit is of no relation to David and Solomon. May want to go back a couple pages where Lightenup’s and I started this conversation and catch up…you’re a little behind!

[DesireTruth]

@Lightenup,

Was it too much to read?

Soooooooo, you can’t prove the Jesus is The Messiah! I understand, I can’t make you see what you don’t want to see; I can only present it. The reality is, it’s up to you to make the choice and I can attest it’s a hard one…for months I kept what I was finding to myself. Also, you would spend less time learning what G-d said than you are currently spending to justify the Jesus.

The question, whether you like it or not, is when did G-d ever impregnate a woman because that is what the NT says G-d did. When did he ever step in and mess with the natural procreation process he created by physically inseminating anyone? HE said to be fruitful and multiply and sent man on his merry way to make babies. G-d’s design is the only proof needed that The Messiah is going to be biologically connected to David thru Solomon. To continue to say G-d impregnated Mary introduces paganism into the faith (criticize the Greek and Romans, but not christianity). You still haven’t given any passage that states G-d will impregnate a woman and you never will, because none exist. This immaculate conception was made up.

To justify the lack of finding this mystery passage of G-d impregnating someone, you counter with creation and Eve not having a biological father; do you struggle with what came first, the chicken or the egg? Nothing existed at the time of creation, no fish, mammals, insects, plants, HUMANS; so your justification falls apart immediately by trying to bring in creation. It would seem you are having an extremely difficult time justifying your beliefs and are reaching deep into the abyss of man’s reasoning to find an answer that could stick; however, the answers are in front of you and all you have to do is read!

Basically, we have strike one against the Jesus being The Messiah; you have provided zero proof or evidence the Jesus inherited his lineage or tribal lineage could come thru the mother. Are you ready to tackle the next item the Jesus never accomplished?

PS
The fact you responded to nothing I wrote didn’t go unnoticed!

[DesireTruth]

@Lightenup,

You keep saying “Prove Jesus is the Messiah” and then narrowing that demand to one point: “He has no biological father, therefore his lineage cannot be traced, therefore he cannot be the Messiah.”

It isn’t just a “single point” where the Jesus fails; this is the beginning point. If the Jesus cannot/does not pass this, he ISN’T The Messiah and there is no reason to continue.

That is not a Tanakh argument; it is your assumption about how God must work.

Your right this isn’t a “Tanakh argument”, it’s a Tanakh fact! The Messiah will be a man who descends from David and Solomon (remember that dynasty forever thing and it was said about whom?!?!); I gave you the passages in black and white showing it and you rejected them.

Let’s separate two issues:

1) Wha t the Tanakh actually requires of the Messiah.

2) Whether Jesus meets those requirements.

What does the Tanakh say The Messiah will do and does the Jesus meet them? The first one I gave you was The Messiah MUST be Jewish and the Ezra passage gives this requirement as the Jewish men sent their non-Jewish wives and children away. Why would they send their children away if Jewishness can come from the father? So Jewishness comes from the mother. The Jesus meets this requirement of being Jewish; his mother was Jewish.

We’re on point two that I gave you; does the Jesus legitimately meet the requirement of being a descendant of David and Solomon?

You are trying to collapse them into one: “If he has no biological father, he fails everything.” The Tanakh does not say that.

Can The Messiah fail at a single point of who G-d said The Messiah will be and what he will do and still be called The Messiah? I would say no! Do you know what the Tanakh says The Messiah is suppose to do? I personally haven’t met a christian who does, pastors included; I didn’t know until a couple years ago.

 

1. Procreation “in the time of Moses”

You ask, “What would have been the understanding of procreation in the time of Moses?” Of course, normal procreation is biological father + biological mother. But the question is not what people normally understood; the question is what God is allowed to do. The Tanakh already shows God acting beyond normal procreation (Isaac, Samson, Samuel). You say “closing and opening a womb isn’t the same as impregnating a woman.” True. But that proves my point: God is not limited by normal biology. The Tanakh never says, “If God acts directly, the result is invalid.” That is your rule, not the text’s.

G-d performed miracles all the time that were beyond “normal understanding” to show the Israelite’s who HE is. Nowhere did I say “If God acts directly, the result is invalid”, you made that up. You agree closing and opening a womb isn’t impregnating a woman and obviously isn’t beyond what G-d can do. The question is, when has G-d ever physically impregnated a woman?

 

2. “If Jesus doesn’t have a biological daddy, how can his lineage be traced back to David?”

You keep repeating this, but you are ignoring how lineage and tribal identity actually work in the Tanakh.

– Biological descent: Jesus is descended from David through Mary (David → Nathan → Mary → Jesus).

– Legal descent: Jesus is descended from David through Joseph (David → Solomon → Joseph → Jesus).

– Divine appointment: God Himself appoints the Messiah as David’s heir (Psalm 2; Psalm 110).

You say, “Everyone counted was counted with their father’s house.” Yes, in the census. That describes how Israel was organized for war. It does not say, “God can never assign lineage except through a biological father.” Genesis 48 shows Jacob assigning tribal identity by adoption. That is lineage by legal fatherhood, not biology. You have not answered that.

Of course I keep repeating this, you have given zero scriptural evidence The Messiah can come thru anyone other than Solomon (dynasty forever); you keep peddling the reasoning and justifications of man. Additionally, where is your explanation of “how lineage and tribal identity actually work in the Tanakh”; please enlighten me. Again, Mary only passes on Jewishness, not tribal lineage; I have given the passages outlining this and you rejected them. Tribal lineage is paternal and I have given those passages to you also…yet rejected!

“Legal descent”, still waiting for the passage where tribal lineage can be passed down by adoption. You site Gen 48 and Joseph’s blessing from Jacob being passed onto his sons as “assigning tribal identity” except Jacob created that “tribal identity” over 400 years before the nation of Israel was formed and this census was taken; what are you talking about?!?!? Concerning the “biological” nature of this, Manasseh and Ephraim were the grandsons of Jacob and would belong to the “house of Jacob” thru Joseph. This was also before G-d said to NOT marry foreigners.

“Divine appointment” and you quote Ps 2, a Psalm about a Davidic king that can be applied to any king and is not strictly messianic. Ps 110 is Messianic appointment?!?! Have you ever taken the Hebrew of verse one and put it into a translator? It’s not a Psalm by David; it’s a Psalm to David. The first “Lord” is the Tetragrammaton for the name of G-d and the second is a lowercase “lord” (ladoni) meaning master or lord and is used in the context of one with authority or power over another; someone is writing about David. Nothing messianic about this chapter and is another christian invention. This is the same verse that supposedly tripped up the Pharisees so they no longer questioned the Jesus, hardly; do really believe the religious leaders didn’t speak Hebrew or know this passage from their scriptures? The mistranslation is what has been tripping up christians for centuries because no one speaks Hebrew.

 

3. “He’s only half human.”

That is rhetoric, not Tanakh. The incarnation claim is that Jesus is fully human and fully from David’s line through Mary, and legally heir through Joseph. The Tanakh does not forbid God from entering His own creation. The Tanakh does not say, “If God acts directly, the result is a pagan demigod.” You are importing Greek categories and then accusing Christianity of being Greek. The Tanakh itself never uses “demigod” language.

Ummmmm?!?! How exactly is this rhetoric, you admit the Jesus doesn’t have a biological father, which means only half of him is human and the rest is “god.” You are siting doctrines when you say the Jesus was “fully human and fully god”; a doctrine that was formalized and accepted at the Counsel of Chalcedon in 451 CE – I thought we were only using the Tanakh as our source. Again, when has G-d ever impregnated a woman in the Tanakh? The Greek and Roman religions were prevalent in the first century and a god impregnating a human woman was common in their religion; and with Greek philosophy merging into the early church thought, it opened the door for paganism to be incorporated into the gentile version of who and what the Jesus is.

Judging from the writings of Paul, who primarily made up the christian faith – the none Jew; this “christian” message was taken to the none Jew because the Jews recognized it was false and rejected it. How many of the “church fathers” were Jewish? Think on that one…

 

4. “Prove Jesus is the Messiah.”

You keep demanding this, but you refuse to engage the actual criteria the Tanakh gives. I laid out ten Tanakh‑based expectations:

And you have ignored the passages I have given from the Tanakh that say who The Messiah is to be and what he will do when he comes.

1. Descendant of David.

NO scriptural source for your “legal” basis or the Mary heredity claim that allows the Jesus to be a descendant of David AND Solomon.

2. King who rules with justice and righteousness.

The Jesus never ruled as king. No scripture source

3. Empowered by the Spirit of the Lord.

No scripture source

4. Brings salvation, deliverance, and restoration.

Salvation from what? Deliverance from whom? Restoration from what? No scripture source

5. Suffers, is rejected, and is vindicated.

Isa 53??? I have asked many times for anyone to explain verse 10, none have; who is speaking where in this chapter, one has tried but their response made no sense and they stopped replying.

6. Exalted by God.

No scripture source

7. Participates in God’s work.

Wisdom in Proverbs 8?? Been over this; it’s speaking of a characteristic personified, not the Jesus.

8. Brings light to the nations.

Who is to be a light to the nations? No scripture source

9. Inaugurates a new covenant.

When did the Jesus inaugurate a new covenant? No scripture source

10. Reign is everlasting.

No scripture source

Those are from the Tanakh, not from later tradition.

Site the source for everyone of your claims!

 

If you want an honest discussion, then pick one of these and we will examine whether Jesus fulfills it using only the Tanakh. If you refuse to do that and keep repeating “no biological father, therefore no Messiah,” then you are not arguing from the Tanakh; you are arguing from your own rule that the Tanakh never gives.

An honest discussion is what I have been trying to have for the last three years, but everyone keeps peddling their beliefs and not scripture. The answers I have given come from the Tanakh, you reject them because they don’t align with your religion. You have failed to provide any passages that confirm what you believe; therefore it would seem you are parroting what you have been told.

 

So here is the direct answer:

– The Tanakh does not require the Messiah to have a human biological father.

Except it does and I have given you the passages!

– The Tanakh does require the Messiah to be from David’s line. Jesus is, through Mary and Joseph.

Yes The Messiah is to be from David’s line thru Solomon and I have given you the passages! Mary is irrelevant, since she passes on Jewishness and Joseph had nothing to do with the conception of the Jesus and is also irrelevant. UNLESS, you can provide where the mother effects tribal lineage or adoption can pass down tribal lineage.

– The Tanakh does not restrict lineage to biology alone. It uses legal fatherhood and adoption (Genesis 48).

Over 400 years before the nation of Israel was formed and the blessing of Joseph was passed onto his sons, Jacobs grandsons by blood.

– The Tanakh does not forbid God from acting directly in the Messiah’s coming.

Where does it say G-d will act directly in the coming of The Messiah? So because it doesn’t say, therefore G-d will?!?

If you truly want to test whether Jesus is the Messiah “according to the Tanakh,” then stop repeating one assumption about biology and start engaging the actual messianic criteria the Tanakh gives.

Again, this is the starting point; the Jesus has failed to fulfill everything that was said The Messiah would do; except for being Jewish.

Stop superimposing the Jesus onto passages that aren’t about him. Your “ten base exceptions” are christian interpretations to fit the Jesus; who did G-d say The Messiah is and what he will do (don’t forget the passages)? You still haven’t proven the Jesus is of the lineage of David and Solomon (Solomon will always be included because that’s what G-d said) so we can move onto the next fail of the Jesus. If you can’t prove it, why do you believe the Jesus is The Messiah? Remove the Jesus goggles because once they’re removed, everything becomes clear.

[DesireTruth]

@Lightenup,

In NONE of what your wrote did you prove the Jesus is The Messiah! I wrote on how the Jesus couldn’t be The Messiah starting with the birth narrative and you respond with criticism of what the Tanakh says, calling what I wrote assumptions; except what would have been the understanding of procreation in the time of Moses? Keep reaching! (G-d closing and opening a womb isn’t the same as impregnating a woman)

If the Jesus doesn’t have a biological daddy, how can his lineage be traced back to David? You even said the census taken in Numbers was “how genealogies are checked” and ever one counted was to be counted with their father’s house (biological); now I am checking the Jesus’ and he’s only half human.

Prove the Jesus is The Messiah!

[DesireTruth]

@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 said,

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

You’re making assumptions; using the “Mary lineage” falls flat because tribal lineage runs only thru the father; I gave you scriptural passages to prove this. Where’s your scripture to support the Mary narrative? We are only speaking of tribal lineage and NOT earthly possessions being passed on. The other issue using Mary, is it goes back to Nathan and NOT Solomon. The next four passages I gave you explicitly state David’s kingdom will continue thru Solomon and not any other son. What did G-d say?

Next you bring up legally, “thru adoption”, Joseph passes on his “heritage”; can you support with scripture tribal lineage can be passed down by adoption? A priest who adopts a son from another tribe cannot make him a priest by adoption; tribal affiliation is passed down biologically from the father; you have the passages.

Let’s theoretically say tribal affiliation can be passed down, Joseph fails to pass down this heir to the kingship because Jeconiah is included in this line of descendants in Matthew. Jeconiah was cursed and his kingship removed and he was to be remembered as having no sons (Jer 22:30, 36:30), no one in his lineage could sit on David’s throne. So what could Joseph pass down to the Jesus when he was in the Jeconiah line and part of that curse.

Going one step further, let’s look at both genealogies in Matthew and Luke and specifically where they match at Shealtiel and Zerubbabel, son and grandson of Jeconiah; using the lineages of either Joseph or Mary, both fail at their overlapping points because of the curse on Jeconiah. Before you say the curse was lifted, provide the passage where G-d restored Jeconiah.

This alone disqualifies the Jesus from ever being the Messiah because he isn’t connected to David and Solomon (whose dynasty did G-d say will continue forever). You pointed out the Jesus doesn’t have a biological father and, by the definition, makes him a demigod – just like the Greek and Roman religions.

[DesireTruth]

@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, 2:2, 32; Ezra 2:59)? Is the Jesus’ biological father from the tribe of Judah?

Does the Jesus pass the requirement of being a descendant of David and Solomon (II Sam. 7:14; I Chron. 17:11-14, 22:9-10, 28:4-6)?

[DesireTruth]

@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 straight back to one of my original questions, is the Jesus the true Messiah. Christianity says he is, PROVE IT beginning with the birth narrative. I have given you multiple passages showing the Jesus couldn’t be the true Messiah, what did you do with them?

[DesireTruth]

@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 can be used as a title of authority and isn’t reserved to address G-d. However, where we differ is this passage being applied to the Jesus. One has to establish first whether or not the Jesus can be or is the true Messiah to have this title given to him. Again, we roll back to my original question, is the Jesus the true Messiah and can this single verse in a marriage Psalm be applied to him.

Point 3. We are in complete agreement when you say Ps 102 explicitly states G-d created the heavens and the earth, remains the same, and HIS years have no end; where we’re going to take a turn from agreement is when these statements are applied to the Jesus. There is nowhere in the Tanakh where G-d says there is anyone who is equal or has the same “divine” qualities as HE does; this writer makes an assumption and applies it to the Jesus because it’s who he wants the Jesus to be.

You say this theology is built on the earlier text of the chapter; so it’s the opinion of the unknown author that has created this theology. Can this idea of a “co-equal” participant in creation or this additional “divine being” who is an exact copy of G-d be supported within the Tanakh? If not, this is a lie and the book needs to be removed post haste.

You say it’s not a misuse of Psalms 102, but a theological conclusion; again, the writer made an assumption at the beginning of the chapter and from that created the conclusion Psalms 102 is about the Jesus. Where’s the proof in the Tanakh that confirms this “son” was appointed by G-d as heir of all things? Is this suppose to be a reference to the Messiah? Where do we find G-d saying this “son” is the “radiance of His glory and the exact representation of His nature”?

I’m not jumping ahead to “atonement and incarnation”; the end of verse 3 says, “When He had made purification of sins”; does G-d need a “helper” to atone and forgive sins, does HE require a blood sacrifice to forgive, and when did HE make an exception and allow for a human sacrifice for the forgiveness of sins?

Nowhere does the Tanakh say G-d has a “helper” of sorts; nowhere does the Tanakh say HE is sending this “helper” for a sacrificial (human sacrifice) purpose for the remediation of sins; nowhere is a divine “son” mentioned in the Tanakh and is why I keep asking for evidence the Jesus is the true Messiah. Did he do what was prophesied the true Messiah would do, beginning with the birth account?

Point 5 & 6. You said quoting me also,

Me: Did Jesus fulfill all that was said the Messiah is to do?

You: That is a legitimate question, but it is a different debate.”

– First question: Does Hebrews misuse the Tanakh?

– Second question: Is Jesus the true Messiah according to the Tanakh?

Your question order should be reversed; but to get your first question out of the way, does “misapply” work better for you? Most of these passages quoted in Hebrews have a Davidic king tone, but does that mean they are automatically Messianic or simply a reference to future kings? The writer applies these passages to the Jesus, and for the christian it resonates. For the one who doesn’t believe the Jesus is the Messiah, there is a twist, or more appropriately, a misapplication. The writer makes the assumption the Jesus is the Messiah, but in his writing offers no support for this conclusion; only passages they believe are pointing to the Jesus.

You say the Jewish writing support a Messianic figure, and you give many examples; but do they support that figure being the Jesus?

You say a discussion of the Jesus being the Messiah is a different debate; however, without first establishing the Jesus as the true Messiah, every other topic of debate is a waste of time; did the Jesus fulfill what was spoken of the Messiah when he came? The Tanakh gives specifics of what he is suppose to do when he arrives. To use the argument the Jesus will accomplish them when he returns falls flat; nowhere in the Tanakh does it ever state the Messiah will come and do nothing, but in the future will return again to do what was said (THIS is an entire topic by itself as the Jesus said he would return in their lifetime and didn’t – Matt 24; how does one tell a false prophet – Deut 13:1-3; 18:20-22).

I have given a list of passages from the Tanakh of who the Messiah is and what he’ll do, what did you do with them?

[DesireTruth]

@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 book of Hebrews out of the Greek Testament and throw it into the trash.

Are these passages correctly being applied to the Jesus or have they been taken out of context? If they are rightfully applied, then explain how each are – once again, support with the Tanakh in the context it was originally written.

If these passages quoted are Messianic in nature (wouldn’t they also be Davidic since the Messiah is to be a descendant of whom…hmmm), we come right back to my original question of whether or not the Jesus is the true Messiah; did he fulfill all that was said the Messiah was to do while he was here, beginning with his birth account? Additionally, find the passages where G-d said a single man was to be the propitiation for the sins of mankind by becoming a human sacrifice, where the innocent could take on the guilt of another, or where G-d said he would come to earth as a man and freely sacrifice himself because of sin.

For Psalms 2 you site Targum Jonathon except this Targum was the Torah and Prophets and not the Writings and it was written in the second century CE; you also site a passage from the Babylonian Talmud (Sukkah 52a) which was compiled between the 3rd and 6th centuries CE. Both writings were after the Jesus not before, little confused how this supports “Jews interpret Psalms 2 as Messianic before chrisitanity”.

You continue on with “You keep repeating, “Psalm 102 is about Jerusalem.” Yes — in its original context.” and that is where we stop! A theological explanation after that are interpretations. You say “Midrash Rabbah (Numbers 14:1) applies Psalm 45 to the Messiah.” Except Psalms 45:6-7 isn’t mentioned anywhere in this Midrash only verses 9, 14,& 17 are mentioned and none are messianic…hopefully this was a misprint and you can give the correct source or provide exactly where in this Midrash you’re reading and getting your information.

The only question to be asked is whether or not the Jesus is the true Messiah, according to the Tanakh he NEVER fulfilled a thing that was spoken the Messiah is to do. Let alone come from the line of David. Whether or not the Jesus is the true Messiah is the only question that requires an honest and truthful answer.

[DesireTruth]

@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 obscurity, more power to you.

Point 1. I find it funny how you conveniently bring in the Septuagint to prove your stance. If the Septuagint was the scripture used during the first few centuries of the new millennium, why isn’t it accepted as the authority on which all translations are based? The reason is it has become unreliable today; to many changes have been made since it was first written. The “Septuagint” was originally translated from the Hebrew to the Greek in the third century BCE and consisted of the Torah. Over the course of the next two centuries the rest of the Tanakh was translated. The book we have today, isn’t the same book the Jews originally translated. So the book we have today ISN’T the same book of the first century!

Point 2. Psalm 2 and 2 Samuel 7 – the question isn’t whether they are pointing to a Davidic king or not; the question is to whom they are pointing, and they aren’t pointing to the Jesus. The Jesus never served as king, the Jesus never ruled in Jerusalem, the Jesus ISN’T even qualified as the Messiah because he did nothing the Messiah is to do. Since tribal affiliation is pasted down from the father and the Jesus was conceived of the spirit and NOT a man, PLEASE PROVIDE the biblical basis for the idea of a father passing on his tribal line thru adoption.

Point 3. Psalm 104:4 read first paragraph above.

Point 4. Psalm 45 How is this a Psalm pointing to the Messiah? Notice how YOU haven’t explained a thing!! Then claim this is Jewish tradition; please provide your source! If you had bothered to read the Psalm in its entirety there is NOTHING messianic about it, it’s a “poem celebrating the Davidic king’s marriage to a lovely princess. The psalmist praises the king for his military prowess and commitment to justice, urges the bride to be loyal to the king, and anticipates that the marriage will be blessed with royal offspring.”

You make the assumption the “your throne, O G-d…” is correct; the Hebrew translations of this passage say “your throne is from G-d”, “your divine throne”, “your throne, O judge.” The word here is “elohim”, but is it ALWAYS a reference to G-d? No! Ex 21:6, 22:8-9 judges are called elohim; in Ps 82:1 little “g” gods are called elohim; Ps 82:6 rulers are called elohim; I Sam 28:13 a “spirit” is called elohim. The term “elohim” ISN’T reserved to G-d. Why would you presume in this Psalm the reference is referring to G-d Almighty and NOT a title of authority as the Psalm implies, a king? The entire first chapter of the book of Hebrews equates the Jesus to be equal to G-d and is G-d. Talk about blasphemous!

You go on to say: “Hebrews applies the royal psalm to the Messiah exactly as Jewish tradition did.”; provide the source for this “Jewish tradition”! There is nothing Messianic in Ps 45; it’s to/for/about a Davidic king. When did the Jesus get married as described in this Psalm? She is to leave her homeland, forget her family, and submit to the king. What about the sons she is to bare to carry on this dynasty (what dynasty will be carried on by the offspring of the Jesus)? Prove this is a messianic prophecy pointing to the Jesus; the text DOESN’T SUPPORT IT! Copy and paste theology doesn’t work; context does!

Point 5. Psalm 102 is a Psalm “lamenting the de­struction of Jerusalem and praying for its restoration”; who is said to restore Jerusalem throughout the Tanakh? Somehow this Psalm now becomes the Father applying who HE is to the Jesus?!!? You then say “This is not “corruption.” It is a theological conclusion”; so theology is the basis for your belief, shouldn’t it be scripture? Where’s your scriptural proof G-d said HE needed anyone to help HIM? How small is your god that HE requires a helper; my G-d created everything, from the seen to the unseen, and did it all be himself by speaking it into being?

You continue on saying: “You haven’t refuted the argument. You’ve only assumed the conclusion is impossible.” Wasn’t my original statement of the sited passages not being about the Jesus and offering my thoughts not good enough, what more did you want? If you would place G-d’s word in the context it was written, you wouldn’t be so confused by what it says and have to perform mental gymnastics to make what you believe sound like truth.

Then you say: “If the Son shares the attributes of YHWH (eternal, unchanging, creator), then the Son participates in the divine identity.” REALLY!! If my son “shares the attributes” of me, then my son is me??!? I think my spouse may have something to say about that!

Point 6. I am NOT taking the Masoretic text and calling it superior to the Septuagint. I’m reading the words written in modern translations and comparing them to the Hebrew texts. To say the Septuagint is widely used by Jews is laughable; if you were saying in the first century, do you really think the Jewish religious leaders in Jerusalem didn’t read, write, or speak Hebrew and didn’t teach from their texts but used a Greek translation instead?!? The book of Hebrews is authored by an unknown and was rejected in the original canon of the Greek Testament.

The bottom line, the argument isn’t over the reliability of the text, it’s the application of the text; the unknown writer of Hebrews has misused and twisted the text from the Tanakh and applying it to the Jesus. When the Jewish text is placed in context, there is NOTHING about a Jesus to be found anywhere.

I find it interesting how the Jewish thought is only important when it confirms your beliefs; everything else, useless and wrong – like who their Messiah is and how they interpret their scriptures.

 

PS

I have a copy of the Septuagint Bible published in 1954 that I am willing to part with; let me know in a PM if you’re interested. I have no use for it anymore.

[DesireTruth]

@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 getting married and all the sons he will have to “carry on the dynasty of your ancestors.” It’s the previous verse where this king is called elohim and does elohim automatically signify it’s a reference to G-d? NOPE!! It can refer to judges, kings, spirits, or other gods. Knowing this, why would it be unusual for the writer of this Psalm to call the king “god”?

The point of this is how the writer of the book of Hebrews corrupts this passage by applying it to the Jesus and equating the Jesus equal to G-d.

This Psalm has nothing to do with the Jesus and it’s NOT messianic. It is a royal wedding Psalm meant for a Davidic King. Context is everything!

[Author]

Posts