Jesus did not fulfill what the Messiah was supposed to do.

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Posts: 3222
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2010 4:29 pm

Re: Jesus did not fulfill what the Messiah was supposed to d

Post #21

Post by bjs »

Elijah John wrote:
Perhaps Jesus and Christians, not Jews, are wrong about what the concept of Messiah means.
Yes, if any view which contradicts what Jesus said about the Messiah is true, then what Jesus said about the Messiah cannot be true. That seems like a tautology.
Elijah John wrote: It would not be the first time that "Jesus" was wrong. (see Matthew 16.28) He was wrong (or the Gospel Evangelists were wrong) about his 2nd coming occurring in the lifetime of his apostles. The "some standing here not tasting death" and all that.

Yes, Jews could be wrong as well regarding the expectation of King David's successor ushering in a Messianic age of universal peace, knowledge of God and the primacy of Israel among the Nations. But as far as I know, (unlike the Gospel Evangelists), they have not predicted when this would actually happen.
Read in context, Jesus words in in Matthew 16:28 were not about any kind of second coming.

The Gospel Evangelists (yes, I know that phrase is redundant) record Jesus as explicitly saying that he did not know when the end would come. That makes it difficult to support the claim that they predicted when it would happen.
Understand that you might believe. Believe that you might understand. –Augustine of Hippo

User avatar
Posts: 3918
Joined: Mon Apr 05, 2010 7:33 am
Location: Australia
Has thanked: 13 times
Been thanked: 20 times

Re: Jesus did not fulfill what the Messiah was supposed to d

Post #22

Post by Mithrae »

rikuoamero wrote: [Replying to post 12 by Mithrae]
One could make apologetic deflections for Judah's loss of sovereignty and kingship in the 6th century BCE or even for the dispersal and resettlement of the land as merely being a brief hiatus. But following 135CE - when Israel/Judah had existed for only ~1300-1700 years to begin with - there ceased to be any Judaic state whatsoever for over 1800 years. Unambiguously, the ruler's staff had departed from Judah. If he to whom it belongs had not come to usher in 'the obedience of the nations' by that point then clearly Jews were wrong in that prediction.
What about before 135CE? The last king of Judah was Zedekiah, who ruled roughly 600 years beforehand, from 597-586 BC. Clearly by either your point or mine, this writing of a "ruler's staff" cannot be an actual true prophecy.
I did note the 6th century BCE exilic period in my post ;) But strictly speaking Zedekiah was not the last sovereign king of Judah (the state) nor its last leader from the tribe of Judah; after the return from Babylon the governor Zerubbabel was supposedly a grandson of king Jeconiah if memory serves, and in the 2nd and 1st centuries BCE Judah once again achieved autonomy under the Hasmonean kings. Simon bar Kokhba only claimed a title of Prince, so the last king of Judah was Herod Agrippa I in 41-44CE.

By that point of course, 'the obedience of the nations' was starting to be offered to a certain messianic claimant. The verse itself arguably implies that this obedience would not be in the form of political rulership, because if it were then the ruler's staff would still be with Judah.

Maybe the early Christians somehow engineered the end of the Judaic state to make sure that the 'prophecy' would be true?

Post Reply