Was Jesus the messiah of the Hebrew bible?

[Nickman]

Cholland said he would like to debate this point so here it is.

Was Jesus the the messiah as prescribed by the Hebrew bible?

What prophecies does he fulfill and why?

Can he be shown to not fulfill the Hebrew text?

Cholland your up.....

[Goat]

The Daniel 9:24-27 prophecy really narrows down the time frame the Messiah was to come to 31 A.D. And the Messiah had to come before the stoppage of sacrifice and destruction of Jerusalem which occurred in 70 A.D., as that clearly is stated as occurring right after the coming of the Messiah.

He was also to be peaceful and trusted by the Gentiles. (Isaiah 42:1-7)

Ah yes, the good old '70 weeks' passage. Since the time frame which Daniel was written about was much longer the 70 weeks', the Christian has to take an end date, and then work backwards to try to find something they can interpret as being the starting point. As a 'prophecy' to predict Jesus, it's a total and utter failure.

Isaiah 42:1-7 is part of the '4th servant song'. If you read it in context.. .. you will see the writer of deutro Isaiah specifically identifies who the servant is.. and guess what, it's not the messiah.

Isaiah 43:9
He said to me, "You are my servant, Israel, in whom I will display my splendor."

Reading in context is important, I think.

Re: Dan 9: 4-27,
A few keys are necessary to decipher this passage. The Hebrew word for "week" is the same word as for"seven", and a day represents one year; hence "seven weeks" is 49 years, "sixty-two weeks" is 434 years, and "sevety weeks" is 490 years. The "going forth of the word to restore and build Jersalem" refers to the order of King Artaxerxes to rebuild Jerusalem recorded in Ezra 7:11-26, which was given in 458 B.C. It took exactly "seven weeks", or 49 years, to complete the building of the walls of Jerusalem, indicated by the fact that 49 years after Artaxerxes' decree, or in 409 B.C., Nehemiah ended his appointment as governor of Judah. Adding another sixty-two weeks, or 434 years, brings us to A.D. 26, whihc is the year which many, including the ancient Church historian Bishop Eusibius, give as the date of Jesus' baptism in the Jordan by John and the beginning of His public ministry. Then, in the "half of the week" --- that is, three and a half years later --- the "the victim and the sacrifice shall fail". And it was about three years and four months after Jesus' baptism that He was crucified, at which time the Temple veil was rent in two as a sign that the Temple sacrifices would henceforth fail. (The fact that the Temple sacrifces failed at the time of the crucifixtion is further confirmed in a passage in the Talmud in Rosh Hashanah 31b.) Then within a generation, the Romans came and destroyed the Temple and the entire city of Jerusalem and sent the Jews into exile, fulfilling the verse " a people with their leader that shall come, shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be waste, and after the end of the war the appointed desolation".

That is known as trying to retrofit passages into events. It's pretty much fluff and nonsense, and playing with numbers to try to work things out. .. and, if you read the gospels, it doesn't say '3 years and 4 months'.. it doesn't give dates on things at all.. that is proclamations and twisting things about to make them fit. It doesn't say when Jesus was actually baptized , it doesn't say a lot of things.. but miraculously, without dates being mentioned, the dates are manufactured to fit.

It is really reaching in desperation to fit things in.

It seems to me that what is being done is taking a passage here, then taking another unrelated passage there to try to weave them together, and justify a passage in the NT, to make it appear that the passages are talking about "THe Messiah" when they aren't. It also takes ambigous statements that need to be seen as written in 'code' to justify Jesus as being 'predicted' If seems things overly complicated, and you need a decoder ring to interpret it, then, things are just plain wrong.

[jedicri]

The Daniel 9:24-27 prophecy really narrows down the time frame the Messiah was to come to 31 A.D. And the Messiah had to come before the stoppage of sacrifice and destruction of Jerusalem which occurred in 70 A.D., as that clearly is stated as occurring right after the coming of the Messiah.

He was also to be peaceful and trusted by the Gentiles. (Isaiah 42:1-7)

Ah yes, the good old '70 weeks' passage. Since the time frame which Daniel was written about was much longer the 70 weeks', the Christian has to take an end date, and then work backwards to try to find something they can interpret as being the starting point. As a 'prophecy' to predict Jesus, it's a total and utter failure.

Isaiah 42:1-7 is part of the '4th servant song'. If you read it in context.. .. you will see the writer of deutro Isaiah specifically identifies who the servant is.. and guess what, it's not the messiah.

Isaiah 43:9
He said to me, "You are my servant, Israel, in whom I will display my splendor."

Reading in context is important, I think.

Re: Dan 9: 4-27,
A few keys are necessary to decipher this passage. The Hebrew word for "week" is the same word as for"seven", and a day represents one year; hence "seven weeks" is 49 years, "sixty-two weeks" is 434 years, and "sevety weeks" is 490 years. The "going forth of the word to restore and build Jersalem" refers to the order of King Artaxerxes to rebuild Jerusalem recorded in Ezra 7:11-26, which was given in 458 B.C. It took exactly "seven weeks", or 49 years, to complete the building of the walls of Jerusalem, indicated by the fact that 49 years after Artaxerxes' decree, or in 409 B.C., Nehemiah ended his appointment as governor of Judah. Adding another sixty-two weeks, or 434 years, brings us to A.D. 26, whihc is the year which many, including the ancient Church historian Bishop Eusibius, give as the date of Jesus' baptism in the Jordan by John and the beginning of His public ministry. Then, in the "half of the week" --- that is, three and a half years later --- the "the victim and the sacrifice shall fail". And it was about three years and four months after Jesus' baptism that He was crucified, at which time the Temple veil was rent in two as a sign that the Temple sacrifices would henceforth fail. (The fact that the Temple sacrifces failed at the time of the crucifixtion is further confirmed in a passage in the Talmud in Rosh Hashanah 31b.) Then within a generation, the Romans came and destroyed the Temple and the entire city of Jerusalem and sent the Jews into exile, fulfilling the verse " a people with their leader that shall come, shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be waste, and after the end of the war the appointed desolation".

That is known as trying to retrofit passages into events. It's pretty much fluff and nonsense, and playing with numbers to try to work things out. .. and, if you read the gospels, it doesn't say '3 years and 4 months'.. it doesn't give dates on things at all.. that is proclamations and twisting things about to make them fit. It doesn't say when Jesus was actually baptized , it doesn't say a lot of things.. but miraculously, without dates being mentioned, the dates are manufactured to fit.

It is really reaching in desperation to fit things in.

It seems to me that what is being done is taking a passage here, then taking another unrelated passage there to try to weave them together, and justify a passage in the NT, to make it appear that the passages are talking about "THe Messiah" when they aren't. It also takes ambigous statements that need to be seen as written in 'code' to justify Jesus as being 'predicted' If seems things overly complicated, and you need a decoder ring to interpret it, then, things are just plain wrong.

All you have is a denial, after denial, after denial and nothing to support your denial.

Care to address what was actually written to support your denial?

[Goat]

All you have is a denial, after denial, after denial and nothing to support your denial.

Care to address what was actually written to support your denial?

Uhl, I did.

Perhaps you can show where in the bible that , where the date of Jesus' baptism is mentioned, and show how it is 3 years and 4 months from his cruxifiction. That's a claim you made.. now show it.

You can't.. because the date is not mentioned.. it is 'ASSUMED', or jury rigged into place.

I specifically addressed how your claims are unsupported by the texts.

That's not denial.. that is showing where your claims are wrong.

[faroukfarouk]

The Daniel 9:24-27 prophecy really narrows down the time frame the Messiah was to come to 31 A.D. And the Messiah had to come before the stoppage of sacrifice and destruction of Jerusalem which occurred in 70 A.D., as that clearly is stated as occurring right after the coming of the Messiah.

He was also to be peaceful and trusted by the Gentiles. (Isaiah 42:1-7)

Ah yes, the good old '70 weeks' passage. Since the time frame which Daniel was written about was much longer the 70 weeks', the Christian has to take an end date, and then work backwards to try to find something they can interpret as being the starting point. As a 'prophecy' to predict Jesus, it's a total and utter failure.

Isaiah 42:1-7 is part of the '4th servant song'. If you read it in context.. .. you will see the writer of deutro Isaiah specifically identifies who the servant is.. and guess what, it's not the messiah.

Isaiah 43:9
He said to me, "You are my servant, Israel, in whom I will display my splendor."

Reading in context is important, I think.

Re: Dan 9: 4-27,
A few keys are necessary to decipher this passage. The Hebrew word for "week" is the same word as for"seven", and a day represents one year; hence "seven weeks" is 49 years, "sixty-two weeks" is 434 years, and "sevety weeks" is 490 years. The "going forth of the word to restore and build Jersalem" refers to the order of King Artaxerxes to rebuild Jerusalem recorded in Ezra 7:11-26, which was given in 458 B.C. It took exactly "seven weeks", or 49 years, to complete the building of the walls of Jerusalem, indicated by the fact that 49 years after Artaxerxes' decree, or in 409 B.C., Nehemiah ended his appointment as governor of Judah. Adding another sixty-two weeks, or 434 years, brings us to A.D. 26, whihc is the year which many, including the ancient Church historian Bishop Eusibius, give as the date of Jesus' baptism in the Jordan by John and the beginning of His public ministry. Then, in the "half of the week" --- that is, three and a half years later --- the "the victim and the sacrifice shall fail". And it was about three years and four months after Jesus' baptism that He was crucified, at which time the Temple veil was rent in two as a sign that the Temple sacrifices would henceforth fail. (The fact that the Temple sacrifces failed at the time of the crucifixtion is further confirmed in a passage in the Talmud in Rosh Hashanah 31b.) Then within a generation, the Romans came and destroyed the Temple and the entire city of Jerusalem and sent the Jews into exile, fulfilling the verse " a people with their leader that shall come, shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be waste, and after the end of the war the appointed desolation".

That is known as trying to retrofit passages into events. It's pretty much fluff and nonsense, and playing with numbers to try to work things out. .. and, if you read the gospels, it doesn't say '3 years and 4 months'.. it doesn't give dates on things at all.. that is proclamations and twisting things about to make them fit. It doesn't say when Jesus was actually baptized , it doesn't say a lot of things.. but miraculously, without dates being mentioned, the dates are manufactured to fit.

It is really reaching in desperation to fit things in.

It seems to me that what is being done is taking a passage here, then taking another unrelated passage there to try to weave them together, and justify a passage in the NT, to make it appear that the passages are talking about "THe Messiah" when they aren't. It also takes ambigous statements that need to be seen as written in 'code' to justify Jesus as being 'predicted' If seems things overly complicated, and you need a decoder ring to interpret it, then, things are just plain wrong.

All you have is a denial, after denial, after denial and nothing to support your denial.

Care to address what was actually written to support your denial?

Greetings to all.
Jedicri
No matter what you present they will be in denial.
Two question that can sum it all.
Is there any verse in the OT that Jesus fulfilled?
They will answer in the negative.

Final question
Will you ever accept Jesus as your Messiah if he comes back and fulfill all your Messanic demands?
They will evade the answer with all kind off excuses..Its called Talmud teachings at its best subterfuge.

Have a peaceful day.

[cnorman18]

No matter what you present they will be in denial.
Two question that can sum it all.
Is there any verse in the OT that Jesus fulfilled?
They will answer in the negative.

A blazing falsehood. From post 242:

...I told you he possibly fulfilled the birth and the Judaic lineage passages you posted...

And that is only one of several times that he and others noted this. Everyone here has acknowledged that Jesus fulfilled the birth and lineage requirements of the Messiah -- as did several million other Jews throughout Jewish history.

Final question
Will you ever accept Jesus as your Messiah if he comes back and fulfill all your Messanic demands?
They will evade the answer with all kind off excuses..Its called Talmud teachings at its best subterfuge.

Another blatant falsehood. Also from post 242:

I also answered your question that asks if I would believe Jesus to be the Messiah if he returned and fulfilled these other requirements that you know he hasn't fulfilled yet. I did this by telling you that Jesus failed his own claims and directed you to the thread "Olivet Discourse" and provided a link. So to me it is impossible for Jesus to fulfill the actual messianic requirements that truly matter.

But more importantly: Here, at last, is a direct reference to the Talmud, with an apparent allegation that its teachings contain or recommend "subterfuge." You keep insisting that we, collectively, have not answered your questions -- when we clearly have, and repeatedly. This, while YOU have been asked, over and over, publicly on the forum and privately by PM, to explain your understanding of the Talmud and your sources for those opinions. You have rather glaringly refused to do so. Since this last post contains only one bit of actual content, i.e. that the Talmud has something to do with "subterfuge," I ask -- nay, DEMAND -- that you back up that claim with facts and references.

I note also that (1) you have not yet acknowledged your plagiarism in your first post on this thread; (2) that you still refuse to acknowledge or respond to our answers to your questions, but only continue to claim, FALSELY, that your questions are being avoided; and (3) that you are still refusing to give your OWN opinions on these matters and are continuing to hide behind an endless series of questions, the answers to which you ignore while you keep asking them ad infinitum.

Do you actually have anything to SAY here, or are you merely trolling by asking your apparently pointless, propagandistic, and long-answered "questions"?

[ThatGirlAgain]

Greetings to all.
Jedicri
No matter what you present they will be in denial.
Two question that can sum it all.
Is there any verse in the OT that Jesus fulfilled?
They will answer in the negative.

Final question
Will you ever accept Jesus as your Messiah if he comes back and fulfill all your Messanic demands?
They will evade the answer with all kind off excuses..Its called Talmud teachings at its best subterfuge.

Have a peaceful day.

Moderator Comment

It would appear that your question has been answered repeatedly. If you believe that the answer given does not address the question, please give a detailed explanation of how it fails in that respect.

In addition, referring to religious literature of another faith as 'subterfuge' is uncivil. Please avoid incivility on this site.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator comments do not count as a strike against any posters. They only serve as an acknowledgment that a post report has been received, but has not been judged to warrant a moderator warning against a particular poster.

[faroukfarouk]

[font=Verdana][/font]
Greetings to all
Nickman let me set the record straight and put everything in its proper perspective.
To begin with I want to apologize for assuming you to be a Jew.My assumption was based from my posting no 238 in which I asked a question to all Jews from the Judaism religion and you replyed.Now that you not a Jew the entire ballgame has changed.
Regarding refutations I want you to understand I am not not here to get involved in unnecessary heated argument because it just time and energy wasting and its all very visible in this very thread.I have read the thread on the Olivet Discourse (all 10 pages) and itsa the same merry go round trip.Claims,refutations,claims,refutations..on and on with arguments that eventually end in heated exchange of name calling and accusations.The question is what have you achieved.You have not proven anything.You still hang on to your views and those against you still hold on to there views because there is nothing convincing you gave them to change their views.The bottom line is if you do not use intellectual logic in answering simple questions then you will never go forward.
Note on my first posting in this thread I did say quite clearly that the truth can be very difficult to accept expecially if one who has already made up his or her mind that Jesus is not the Messiah and I am sure although you have made up your mind you stand for intellectual reasoning.
Lets look at what you have presented so far and lets reason our way forward.
I fully agree with you that Jesus did not fill the meat and taters" and its my opinion that there is much more as to why he was rejected by his own people.This is something that I wish to discuss later.
Note there are 2 questions that I cannot find answers from your postings 171,180 and 181.So please enlighten me where I can find the answers to your statement.

1.You wrote post 171
the Messiah wasn't supposed to KNOW he was the messiah and proclaim himself as such.
Where can I find this in the OT?

2.You wrote. post 239
Another would be ruling all nations from Jerusalem and having all nations answer to him.
Where can I find this in the OT?

The above 2 are Messianic demands.Now show me where I can find it in the OT?


You wrote. post 181
Jesus cannot fulfill those because Israel is its own nation and no longer captive, and this is not a result of his actions.
I fully agree with you 100% but at the same token the expected Jewish Messiah will also not be able to fulfil this rule and this is simple logic.

You wrote post 171
Jesus never delivered the Israelites from the Assyrians and he never will because the Assyrians don't exist anymore.
Again I totally agree with you 100% but again the same logic applies to the coming Jewish Messiah.Logically he will also not be able to fillfull this verse.Maybe there is an error on the verse or mabe we not reading it properly.Who knows maybe the Assyrians are still alive and they are living under a different title.A DNA test can prove if they still around.

You wrote post 251
Jesus cannot fulfill the requirements because he is dead
Can you actually prove to me that Jesus is dead?

Note if you cannot answer these questions then I regard it as opinion based conjecture.

May peace and blessings be upon Jesus,his mother Mary and all mentioned Prophets.
May you all have a peaceful day.

[Goat]

[font=Verdana][/font]
Greetings to all
Nickman let me set the record straight and put everything in its proper perspective.
To begin with I want to apologize for assuming you to be a Jew.My assumption was based from my posting no 238 in which I asked a question to all Jews from the Judaism religion and you replyed.Now that you not a Jew the entire ballgame has changed.
Regarding refutations I want you to understand I am not not here to get involved in unnecessary heated argument because it just time and energy wasting and its all very visible in this very thread.I have read the thread on the Olivet Discourse (all 10 pages) and itsa the same merry go round trip.Claims,refutations,claims,refutations..on and on with arguments that eventually end in heated exchange of name calling and accusations.The question is what have you achieved.You have not proven anything.You still hang on to your views and those against you still hold on to there views because there is nothing convincing you gave them to change their views.The bottom line is if you do not use intellectual logic in answering simple questions then you will never go forward.
Note on my first posting in this thread I did say quite clearly that the truth can be very difficult to accept expecially if one who has already made up his or her mind that Jesus is not the Messiah and I am sure although you have made up your mind you stand for intellectual reasoning.
Lets look at what you have presented so far and lets reason our way forward.
I fully agree with you that Jesus did not fill the meat and taters" and its my opinion that there is much more as to why he was rejected by his own people.This is something that I wish to discuss later.
Note there are 2 questions that I cannot find answers from your postings 171,180 and 181.So please enlighten me where I can find the answers to your statement.

1.You wrote post 171
the Messiah wasn't supposed to KNOW he was the messiah and proclaim himself as such.
Where can I find this in the OT?

2.You wrote. post 239
Another would be ruling all nations from Jerusalem and having all nations answer to him.
Where can I find this in the OT?

The above 2 are Messianic demands.Now show me where I can find it in the OT?


You wrote. post 181
Jesus cannot fulfill those because Israel is its own nation and no longer captive, and this is not a result of his actions.
I fully agree with you 100% but at the same token the expected Jewish Messiah will also not be able to fulfil this rule and this is simple logic.

You wrote post 171
Jesus never delivered the Israelites from the Assyrians and he never will because the Assyrians don't exist anymore.
Again I totally agree with you 100% but again the same logic applies to the coming Jewish Messiah.Logically he will also not be able to fillfull this verse.Maybe there is an error on the verse or mabe we not reading it properly.Who knows maybe the Assyrians are still alive and they are living under a different title.A DNA test can prove if they still around.

You wrote post 251
Jesus cannot fulfill the requirements because he is dead
Can you actually prove to me that Jesus is dead?

Note if you cannot answer these questions then I regard it as opinion based conjecture.

May peace and blessings be upon Jesus,his mother Mary and all mentioned Prophets.
May you all have a peaceful day.

As for Jesus being dead. People die, and the longest anyone is known to have lived that is verified to have ever lived is 122 years 164 days... Jesus is supposed to have lived about 2000 years ago. Therefore, if he lived at all, considering the time frame, he's now dead. Can you show otherwise without resorting to religious material that can not be shown to be true?

[ThatGirlAgain]

As for Jesus being dead. People die, and the longest anyone is known to have lived that is verified to have ever lived is 122 years 164 days... Jesus is supposed to have lived about 2000 years ago. Therefore, if he lived at all, considering the time frame, he's now dead. Can you show otherwise without resorting to religious material that can not be shown to be true?

Even if we refer to the religious material commonly dated to nearly the putative time of the life of Jesus, it clearly states that Jesus died, this point being absolutely essential to the religion being represented. It is true that this material also states that Jesus rose from the dead, so one could argue that Jesus is now alive, but not living on Earth for close to 2000 years.

Certain scriptural references are interpreted as identifying Jesus as being the Messiah. However none of the expectations of what a Messiah was to accomplish have been satisfied. Christianity pushes fulfillment of those expectations to the indefinite future when Jesus comes back again. Dying, rising from the dead, flying up to heaven and coming back again way later were never original messianic expectations.

[cnorman18]

I note for the record that once again Faroukfarouk had refused to answer any questions -- and has once again ignored my oft-repeated, on-point, and reasonable question about his views on the Talmud even as he alludes to it in a condemnatory and contemptuous fashion.

Here are some more questions, which I hope will not be ignored as well:

Now that you not a Jew the entire ballgame has changed.

Why is that?

Why should the fact that a person is or is not a Jew matter?

Is there some significant difference between Jews and non-Jews in debate?

If so, what is that difference?

Note on my first posting in this thread I did say quite clearly that the truth can be very difficult to accept...

Yes, we have all seen that you have said that, and many, many times. I would point out that your "truth" certainly hasn't been "difficult to accept" thus far -- because you have not yet revealed whatever it is you claim that "truth" to be. All you have done is ask questions and ignore answers.

Enough questions. Do you actually have anything to SAY here? If so, what is it?. So far, you have SAID precisely NOTHING.

I respectfully ask that YOU actually answer a few questions YOURSELF. You can start with these:

What is your problem with Jews?

What is your problem with the Talmud?

What difference does or can it make to a Muslim whether or not Jesus was, or was acknowledged to be, the Jewish Messiah?

Would you agree that the Jewish concept of Messiah and the Christian concept of the Christ are two entirely distinct and different ideas? If not, why not?