Death of Jesus

[QuestionMark]

JM,
It's disappointing that you think the idea is inherently ridiculous, I've been under the impression you thought context mattered. I notice that you didn't answer my question though and I'm still interested.
Looking forward to your reply,
QM

 

[jmvizanko]

JM,
It's disappointing that you think the idea is inherently ridiculous, I've been under the impression you thought context mattered. I notice that you didn't answer my question though and I'm still interested.
Looking forward to your reply,
QM

I did answer your question. Jews have never considered the common Christian interpretations of messianic prophecy requirements to be valid, and Jesus was a Jew, so he had no list of 300 or whatever prophecies of the Jewish messiah that he would have thought he fulfilled. If he had had that list, and had fulfilled them (which he didn't) then it would be a different story. And sure, if a person knew they fulfilled many specific prophecies about a messiah, then they might have a good non-paranoid or delusional reason to think that they are a messiah. But please present a highly specific messianic prophecy that is so obvious that the Jews do not deny it is a requirement.

And what isn't ridiculous about god playing favorites?

 

[QuestionMark]

JM,
Since none of the Jews today are two thousand years old, I think you would have to establish that they are the ones entitled to make this interpretation. For instance, you would have to show that they have some type of infallible genetic knowledge. Otherwise we're left with the Scriptures to see to them ourselves with the aide (but not at the mercy) of the Jews. Also, we would be right to do this in light of their Scripture which call them a stiff necked people always rejecting their God and whoring themselves out to the nations.

I do not say this to be offensive but to make a simple point, even God said that the Jews would reject Him when he came but later become jealous and be brought in. You may not be aware of it but there are more Jews becoming Christians today than at any point in history.

As for what is worthy of ridicule I leave that to you to decide, I think that if the God of heaven and earth wanted to make the point of doing the greatest thing through the poor, oppressed, and the foolish then it would be consistent with what He has done since the beginning, and it would make for quite a marvelous tale would it not?

Looking forward to your reply,
QM

 

[jmvizanko]

JM,
Since none of the Jews today are two thousand years old, I think you would have to establish that they are the ones entitled to make this interpretation. For instance, you would have to show that they have some type of infallible genetic knowledge. Otherwise we're left with the Scriptures to see to them ourselves with the aide (but not at the mercy) of the Jews. Also, we would be right to do this in light of their Scripture which call them a stiff necked people always rejecting their God and whoring themselves out to the nations.

I do not say this to be offensive but to make a simple point, even God said that the Jews would reject Him when he came but later become jealous and be brought in. You may not be aware of it but there are more Jews becoming Christians today than at any point in history.

Well in all honesty, I have no idea what the Jewish conception of the messiah was at the time of Jesus. Given the following, I don't even know if there was one:

Judaism 101: Mashiach: The Messiah

But once again, in my opinion, the modern Jewish version of the messiah is just as arbitrarily interpreted from ancient holy texts as is the Christian version.

As for what is worthy of ridicule I leave that to you to decide, I think that if the God of heaven and earth wanted to make the point of doing the greatest thing through the poor, oppressed, and the foolish then it would be consistent with what He has done since the beginning, and it would make for quite a marvelous tale would it not?

Well perhaps the word ridicule is unwarranted. I just can't think of a good reason for a god to play favorites. The Jews, despite all their historical hardships, are not the only, or even the most, oppressed and poor people to have walked the earth. And even if they were, why should they be favored over groups of people that have been highly geographically isolated from them? Seriously, what is a good reason for god to play favorites?

 

[QuestionMark]

JM,
I'm glad we got our modern and ancient concepts of Messiah out of the way, now we can look to the text to find an objective standard. At least it will simplify the issue and allow us to see what Jesus may have thought about Messianic prophecy.

Are you familiar with Daniel's predictions about the Son of Man?

I can agree for the sake of argument that the Jews are not the worst off of all peoples on the earth, but what I would like to put forward is the proposition is that they are the most famous example of a people who have been treated like refuse for much of world history. To begin with they were slaves in Egypt, they left and wandered around as nomads in a desert until the original slaves had been killed off, then they entered a land and were unable to conquer the enemies that inhabited it subsequently inheriting many of the curses, after a long line of disobedience and confusion they were carted off to Babylon. More modern examples are Hitler's spiel and the current position of being surrounded by enemies that want to blow them off the face of the earth. The Jews are the most well known subjects of suffering in the world. I think that this would stand up in an argument for why God chose them, because they were a perfect object for Him to display unconditional love.

Anyway, what do you think about Daniel?

Looking forward to your reply,
QM

 

[jmvizanko]

Nope, I'm not familiar with Daniel's messianic predictions. Do you have a link or list?

And my whole point is that why should god pick any group? Why should a messiah, if he is applicable to all mankind, be delivered to any particular group?

 

[QuestionMark]

JM,
Mankind was alienated from God because of our sinful pursuit of the desires of the flesh. So God was justifying mankind (every nation tribe and tongue) by uniting Himself to them. If you remember in the beginning God made the first man a wife from his own flesh. God made Christ from the flesh of man in order to save man.

Then we have to find out how would God justify man in the flesh, and the answer given is also in Genesis, the son of Eve would strike the serpent's head. Throughout the Old Testament, the prophets more and more clearly indicate what kind of salvation God would send. The son of a woman, later the son of a virgin.

The later prophets recognized that God was saving mankind through a man, a man who would represent all mankind in history, and so they called him the Son of Man. Daniel predicted when the Son of Man would come and the events surrounding his coming.
For instance Daniel predicted the year. Fulfilled Prophecy: Evidence for the Reliability of the Bible | Reasons To Believe Do you think that if your mother told you that you had a miraculous birth that caused her some shame, and that you were born when the Christ was to be born, that might get you thinking you were the Messiah and that this thought would be justified?

Looking forward to your reply,
QM

 

[jmvizanko]

Mankind was alienated from God because of our sinful pursuit of the desires of the flesh. So God was justifying mankind (every nation tribe and tongue) by uniting Himself to them. If you remember in the beginning God made the first man a wife from his own flesh. God made Christ from the flesh of man in order to save man.

Then we have to find out how would God justify man in the flesh, and the answer given is also in Genesis, the son of Eve would strike the serpent's head. Throughout the Old Testament, the prophets more and more clearly indicate what kind of salvation God would send. The son of a woman, later the son of a virgin.

And all of this makes sense how? Why did god have to alienate us? He created us the way we are after all. Why would god need to make anything in order to save us? And why must this thing he made need to be born of a virgin? And the virgin birth is, according to Judaism, a mistranslation of the hebrew word almah, which simply means young woman.

For instance Daniel predicted the year. Fulfilled Prophecy: Evidence for the Reliability of the Bible | Reasons To Believe

And my Jewish Study Bible has the following to say regarding this verse:

"The word anointed is the Heb "mashiah" (Messiah); thus these verses have given rise to much Christian speculation. In the context of the other historical references, however, the anointed leader probably refers to either Zerubbabel or the high priest Joshua, while the anointed one is most likely the high priest Onias III, killed in 171 BCE. The princes is Antiochus IV Epiphanes."

So what makes you think you, or anyone else, has the context and meaning of this highly cryptic, like everything else in the bible, verse?

Do you think that if your mother told you that you had a miraculous birth that caused her some shame, and that you were born when the Christ was to be born, that might get you thinking you were the Messiah and that this thought would be justified?

Do you have evidence that his mother told him he was born according to your interpretation of the Daniel prophecy, and that that was the accepted Jewish meaning of that verse at the time?

And sorry, but my mom telling me 2 statements, regardless of what they are, is not likely to make me think I'm a messiah. Its much more likely to make me think she has a few screws loose.

 

[QuestionMark]

JM,
I see the tone of conversation has changed a bit, so I just wanted to make sure we're talking about what the character Jesus thought. This is literary criticism, but you don't assume that the authors were in error when something doesn't make sense in literary criticism. You assume you missed something, or misinterpreted, or were fooled into believing something about a previously unrevealed mystery.

This is why I'm taking the approach of the question of Jesus' sanity. I'm saying that the Messiah complex is not insane if you have reason to believe that you're the Messiah. Delusions of grandeur do not present like the character Jesus of Nazareth. He does not speak or act like someone suffering from mental illness at all. He speaks and acts like someone who has reason to believe He is the Messiah, so He does what the Messiah does (please let me know if capitalizing pronouns is a problem).

The reason why I went to Daniel is because Jesus calls himself the Son of Man, Daniel's name for the Messiah. The reason I went into some detail about the problem is because we were discussing why Jesus was born in the flesh to a Jew(a particular tribe). God chose the Jews in order to bring forth the Messiah, and He chose them because they were the best people suited to His purpose of bringing the Messiah from the dregs of the earth. Does this make more sense now?

Finally to address your questions, I'm not arguing that I have the only valid interpretation or even a valid interpretation. I'm arguing that this is what Jesus thought of Himself, and why He considered Himself Messiah. Jesus called himself the Son of Man because He believed Himself to be the Son of Man. The implications depend on what we garner from who the Son of Man is (which we haven't done yet).

I hope you're not tired of the conversation already, it was just getting good!

Looking forward to your reply,
QM

 

[jmvizanko]

JM,
I see the tone of conversation has changed a bit, so I just wanted to make sure we're talking about what the character Jesus thought. This is literary criticism, but you don't assume that the authors were in error when something doesn't make sense in literary criticism. You assume you missed something, or misinterpreted, or were fooled into believing something about a previously unrevealed mystery.

I'm not familiar with "literary criticism" at all, or what that all entails. But whatever it is, I disagree with the fact that if you are reading something, and it doesn't make sense, that means you have misinterpreted or missed something. People can write gibberish, or write about something in such a way that it is impossible to ever decipher what they actually meant without having a time machine and actually asking them.

This is why I'm taking the approach of the question of Jesus' sanity. I'm saying that the Messiah complex is not insane if you have reason to believe that you're the Messiah. Delusions of grandeur do not present like the character Jesus of Nazareth.

I don't think you have given any substantial reasons for him to believe he was the Messiah. And grandeur and messiah complexes are not necessarily coupled with incoherence or unintelligent gibberish. I have extremely severe bipolar disorder, and I have had bouts with both intense mania, that have included messiah complexes and hyper-religious grandiose delusions. And in those states, despite my delusions, I still maintained all the intelligence that was in my long term memory and normal thinking capabilities.

I don't necessarily think that Jesus was bipolar. But I am just saying, that delusions of grandeur come from all sorts of sources, and many people have thought they were the messiah throughout history for whatever reasons, good or bad. And many of these people had a lot of intelligent things to say, coupled with their, we can all agree, insanity. And only one or none of them are correct about actually being the messiah.

He does not speak or act like someone suffering from mental illness at all. He speaks and acts like someone who has reason to believe He is the Messiah, so He does what the Messiah does.

Well considering how short the gospels are, we really just don't know enough about the man to make good conclusions about him. If he really was the most important person to have ever existed, then god did a crappy job of giving future generations a lot of knowledge about him.

(please let me know if capitalizing pronouns is a problem).

No problem. I suffer from doing the opposite. And its not to belittle terms like god or the bible or jesus, its just because I'm lazy with the shift key. (ok, maybe its a bit fun to not capitalize them, I have to admit)

The reason why I went to Daniel is because Jesus calls himself the Son of Man, Daniel's name for the Messiah. The reason I went into some detail about the problem is because we were discussing why Jesus was born in the flesh to a Jew(a particular tribe). God chose the Jews in order to bring forth the Messiah, and He chose them because they were the best people suited to His purpose of bringing the Messiah from the dregs of the earth. Does this make more sense now?

No, it doesn't. Why would god need to bring forth a messiah from the dregs of the earth? Or better yet, why would he need to bring forth a messiah at all? What is the fundamental reasoning for needing one?

Finally to address your questions, I'm not arguing that I have the only valid interpretation or even a valid interpretation. I'm arguing that this is what Jesus thought of Himself, and why He considered Himself Messiah. Jesus called himself the Son of Man because He believed Himself to be the Son of Man. The implications depend on what we garner from who the Son of Man is (which we haven't done yet).

Well feel free to expound on what you think the Son of Man is then, and why, because I have no opinion, as I don't think there is ever supposed to be, or ever should be a need for, one.

I hope you're not tired of the conversation already, it was just getting good!

I never am, especially when talking with somebody that is civil and interested in what both sides are presenting. Which unfortunately is not the case a lot of the time. But the conversations like these are what we are on this site for.

 

[QuestionMark]

JM,
For the purposes of this discussion literary criticism means that when you read a book like Harry Potter and something doesn't make sense you don't assume the author made a glaring error. The primary assumption should not be that the text is flawed, the primary assumption should be that you don't have all the data relevant to the question. This is an aside though, the point is that declaring the text to be fatally flawed should be reserved for those who have sufficient expertise.

Also an aside, is the conversation about Jesus' intelligence. Personally I do not think intelligence is the primary characteristic in view, and probably not even a secondary characteristic. I'd say the honesty of Jesus is primary. Did Jesus honestly believe that the Messiah scriptures pertained to Him? I think so.

I'm curious, have you ever read all four gospels? You say they are short and don't present enough to make good conclusions about him, a finding that I entirely disagree with. I find that the more unbiased people like Einstein were amazed at the realness and the force of personality presented in the gospels.

And a final historical treatment before focusing on prophecy: The reason why God 'needed' to bring forth a Messiah was to show that the greatness of His redemption did not depend on human will or effort. He took unwilling people with pathetic effort(in most cases, no effort) and changed the world with them. The greatest historical credit to the Jews is their giving birth to Jesus of Nazareth.

So, beholding the Son of Man.

Son of Man is a title used almost exclusively in Ezekiel, Daniel, and the New Testament(especially the gospels). The "Son of Man" figure represents humanity to Jesus Son of man - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia It's also another way of asking the question "Who did Jesus think He was?" Jesus thought He was the Son of Man. He used this title dozens of times more than Messiah. So we could say that Jesus didn't have a Messiah Complex, he had a Son of Man complex.

Jesus saw himself as the fulfillment of the prophets:

Jn 5:39 You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me,
Jn 5:40 yet you refuse to come to me to have life.

And I think we can hardly blame him, since He came at the appointed time:

Some time before 500 B.C. the prophet Daniel proclaimed that Israel's long-awaited Messiah would begin his public ministry 483 years after the issuing of a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem (Daniel 9:25-26). He further predicted that the Messiah would be "cut off," killed, and that this event would take place prior to a second destruction of Jerusalem. Abundant documentation shows that these prophecies were perfectly fulfilled in the life (and crucifixion) of Jesus Christ. The decree regarding the restoration of Jerusalem was issued by Persia's King Artaxerxes to the Hebrew priest Ezra in 458 B.C., 483 years later the ministry of Jesus Christ began in Galilee. (Remember that due to calendar changes, the date for the start of Christ's ministry is set by most historians at about 26 A.D. Also note that from 1 B.C. to 1 A.D. is just one year.) Jesus' crucifixion occurred only a few years later, and about four decades later, in 70 A.D. came the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus.

So, I'd like to establish one thing with you. Jesus thought that the Scriptures were talking about him and his belief (whether or not it was a delusion of grandeur) caused him to love people. Would you agree?

I feel like our conversation is getting a bit disjoined, what would you like to concentrate on?

Looking forward to your reply,
QM

 

[jmvizanko]

Also an aside, is the conversation about Jesus' intelligence. Personally I do not think intelligence is the primary characteristic in view, and probably not even a secondary characteristic. I'd say the honesty of Jesus is primary. Did Jesus honestly believe that the Messiah scriptures pertained to Him? I think so.

It seems he did, whether or not there was any derangement behind why he did, even though you obviously assume there wasn't. But if he is god, or the son of god, why wouldn't he exhibit higher intelligence than other great thinkers and philosophers? Because I see nothing about what he said to suggest that.

I'm curious, have you ever read all four gospels? You say they are short and don't present enough to make good conclusions about him, a finding that I entirely disagree with. I find that the more unbiased people like Einstein were amazed at the realness and the force of personality presented in the gospels.

I have read a large percentage of the gospels, but not completely. My whole point is that, you can go get a biography of almost any other important person that existed within the last few centuries that contains exponentially larger amounts of information about the person. If Jesus was the most important person ever, and I assume you would agree with that, then god did not do a very good job of collecting a lot of information about him and preserving it for future generations. Even the new testament in its total is a joke in size compared to the old.

And a final historical treatment before focusing on prophecy: The reason why God 'needed' to bring forth a Messiah was to show that the greatness of His redemption did not depend on human will or effort. He took unwilling people with pathetic effort(in most cases, no effort) and changed the world with them. The greatest historical credit to the Jews is their giving birth to Jesus of Nazareth.

Once again, statements that have no logically deducible reason for being true. Why does god need to demonstrate "that the greatness of His redemption did not depend on human will or effort," whatever that even means?

And "The greatest historical credit to the Jews is their giving birth to Jesus of Nazareth," would be a pretty offensive statement if said to a Jew, and I completely disagree considering I don't place any importance on the man Jesus.

So we could say that Jesus didn't have a Messiah Complex, he had a Son of Man complex.

I don't see a difference between these two.

Jn 5:39 You diligently study the Scriptures because you think that by them you possess eternal life. These are the Scriptures that testify about me,
Jn 5:40 yet you refuse to come to me to have life.

And I think we can hardly blame him, since He came at the appointed time:

Except all you have to do is pick up my Jewish Study Bible and find a completely different interpretation of every prophecy you are listing from a Christian standpoint. So why are they wrong and you are right? Ad nauseum, but the Bible just isn't clear enough. And do you have any other prophecies other than this one that is able to be interpreted in ways other than the one you claim is correct?

So, I'd like to establish one thing with you. Jesus thought that the Scriptures were talking about him and his belief (whether or not it was a delusion of grandeur) caused him to love people. Would you agree?

No I would not. You don't need to believe you are the messiah to have a reason to love people. And he probably learned to love people long before he thought he was the messiah. It doesn't take belief in anything to learn how to love, and it comes naturally to people of all sorts and creeds.

I feel like our conversation is getting a bit disjoined, what would you like to concentrate on?

Eh, I'm ok with the disjointedness. Its easy enough to deal with, there are just more questions and subjects on the table is all.

 

[Danmac]

Jesus never died. He just changed his apparel.

John11:26 Whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?"

 

[jmvizanko]

Jesus never died. He just changed his apparel.

John11:26 Whoever lives and believes in me will never die. Do you believe this?"

Very compelling argument...

 

[waitasec]

Jesus never died. He just changed his apparel.

interesting.
so who was the lamb of god, a wolf in sheep's clothing?

 

[QuestionMark]

JM,
I would point out that if thousands of years of biographies through thousands of pages couldn't do what the gospels did in dozens argues for a different approach than simple numbers. I think that the power of the gospels is the moral teachings coupled with the example of one who follows the moral teaching. The OT provides the background, and the rest of the NT provides the commentary.

Why do you think that intelligence is so important? (You've brought it up several times, and now you're comparing Jesus with philosophers). Frankly I don't think intelligence is very important. The problems in the world stem from our killing, stealing, and destroying not our failing IQ tests. You may have one thing going for you though, it seems like the invention of video games decreased crime rates in America

Finally, I'd like to remind you that I don't have to prove or disprove the ancient Jewish, modern Jewish, ancient Christian, or modern Christian interpretation of prophecy in order to show that Jesus saw himself as the fulfillment of prophecy. All I've been trying to do this whole time is show that it's not insane to believe you're the Messiah if you have reason to believe you're the Messiah. After all, look what the life of Jesus has accomplished in the world so far. At the very least, one third of the world pays lip service to a man who died almost two thousand years ago.

Here's another one.

Lk 4:14 Jesus returned to Galilee in the power of the Spirit, and news about him spread through the whole countryside.
Lk 4:15 He taught in their synagogues, and everyone praised him.
Lk 4:16 He went to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, and on the Sabbath day he went into the synagogue, as was his custom. And he stood up to read.
Lk 4:17 The scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him. Unrolling it, he found the place where it is written:
Lk 4:18 “The Spirit of the Lord is on me,because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to release the oppressed,
Lk 4:19 to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.”
Lk 4:20 Then he rolled up the scroll, gave it back to the attendant and sat down. The eyes of everyone in the synagogue were fastened on him,
Lk 4:21 and he began by saying to them, “Today this scripture is fulfilled in your hearing.”

This is what Jesus did too, so it seems the prophecy did apply to Him

Looking forward to your reply,
QM

 

[QuestionMark]

JM,
I forgot, the demonstration that God's greatness did not depend on our desire or effort was to show that only God deserves the glory (the honor, the praise). He created the world for His pleasure, and what pleases Him most is getting all the credit.
Looking forward,
QM

 

[jmvizanko]

If god is super intelligent, you would think his son and his book would be super intelligent, yet neither are in the case of your god.

How does your statement about the correct interpretation make any sense? If Jesus does not meet the requirements of the correct interpretation, then he wasn't the messiah and he had no reason to think he was. And all you have to do is google jewish messiah requirements to find long lists of reasons Jesus did not fulfill the requirements, and lists of requirements he came nowhere near completing, all from the Bible.

And no, having a few reasons to think one is a messiah does not mean one should. Why do you think there are so many people that do? Because its not that hard to fulfill lots of the generic ones. Combine that with mental illness, and its no wonder. For instance, what Jesus read in the temple. How many philanthropists could stand up and say that and not be lying?

And the infant mentality of your god wanting credit for everything, and I don't disagree that the Bible implies that, is one of the things I don't understand a great mind, if not the greatest mind ever, would be interested in. A lot of the greatest thinkers in history were very humble, and rejoiced much more in the beauty of what they accomplished and discovered, than wanting credit for it all.

 

[Muffled]

Everyone is responsible for their own actions.

Jesus held both the jews and Pilot accountable in a statement he maade to Pilot.

However Jesus also forgave everyone for doing what they did.

I don't think it helps to play the blame game. Everyone falls short of the glory of God. I don't think it makes any more sense to blame Jesus for His death simply because it was His mission. He pretty much summed it up in the Garden of Gethsemane. If there were another way to save mankind He would have taken it. If there were no sin in the world there would have been no crucifixion. Because there is sin in the world He had no choice but to die for those sins.

 

[QuestionMark]

JM,
Again I think it would be wise to reserve such critical words until you've actually read the book, wouldn't you?

As for Jesus, he doesn't have to have 'the correct interpretation' to have a valid interpretation and see it fulfilled in his own life giving him a reason to believe he is the Messiah. I'm somewhat disappointed that you brought up modern Jewish interpretations of the Messiah when I went to lengths already to show how anyone else's beliefs are irrelevant when we're talking about what Jesus believed. You even implicitly agreed with me.

Concerning generic requirements, I don't think that birth year is a generic requirement. Consider that no one born since the temple was destroyed can even fulfill the requirement Daniel gives, there will be no Jewish Messiah other than the ones that have already come.

I started with a very specific requirement that Jesus had no control over, and moved to a very generic requirement that Jesus had limited control over. The point here is whether or not Jesus was insane to believe He was the Messiah or the Son of God, and I think I'm doing a fair job showing that it's not insane because he actually did fulfill the prophecies. If I do say so myself.

I think it's unwise to accuse God of being infantile for wanting credit for his work. After all, unless you live in an oppressive country, you get credit for your work. To give someone else credit would be a lie, and I think that the mind of God is more averse to lying than given to feigned humility. If God created all things, then He deserves the credit for creating all things. If God saves the world, He deserves the credit for saving the world.

Why do you call this infantile? You seem to be opposed to believing in Jesus without having given it a lot of serious thought.

Looking forward to your reply,
QM