The Pauline Paradox

[Ben Avraham]

Mary and Joseph both also were descendants of David but tribe goes though the Fathers side
Jesus was prophet , priest and king

Jesus was also a priest on the order of Melchizadek (a priest king) ... see the mini drama in Psalm 109 - 110

Yes, Tribes would go through the father's side. It means that, if Joseph was not a biological father to Jesus, this just didn't have it. Jesus was not a prophet because the prophetic system in Israel had cease to exist before he was born (Daniel 9:24) Jesus was not a priest because he had to be from the Tribe of Levi. And last but not least, Jesus was not a king and no one can prove it, unless metaphorically. Melchizedek was a title for the pagan king of Salem who used to offer the firstborn of the Canaanites on the fire for Molech. I would think twice to relate him to Yeshua.

 

[wizanda]

Yeshua never even dreamed that the NT would ever rise.

Mark 13:10 And the gospel must first be published among all nations.

Plus he clearly explains how the false teachers will come, soon after he leaves.... So think he prophesied the deception of the New Testament precisely, as do the prophets.

Jesus said that the Jews would be persecuted falsely for his sake.

Doesn't say Jews, it refers to anyone who would be persecuted for his name sake....

The Jews have been persecuted for rejecting God's laws and messengers; according to the prophets.

I think Luke made a mistake because Jesus said to listen to "Moses" aka the Law and Christians don't want to hear that.

Seriously, and you want to explain the prophets to me as you're a child of Israel?

The Christians have all been led astray on purpose by Paul, John, and Simon the stone (petros), as declared by the prophets; they don't follow Yeshua currently, thus why would they listen to him?

This is the whole point, people don't follow the Law, they claim to follow a book; yet they don't care what the book says, they care about mankind's interpretations of what is required, without questioning....

Thus if they questioned Moses, they would see Christianity defiles the law in every way on purpose; if they questioned Yeshua's teachings, they would see how he fulfills pre-Messianic prophecy, yet people don't, they want to be told how to think.....

So the point in Luke is, even if someone came back from the dead, and reexplained it, people wouldn't listen, as they already show they don't.

if you read Ecclesiastes 9:5,6.

lol, Ecclesiastes is made up rubbish; it doesn't come from Solomon, and has so many errors in it compared to the rest of the Tanakh.

Jesus did not divorce Israel. I think you have Paul in mind.

Nope, completely the other way around; Paul literally states Israel isn't divorced in detail, and Yeshua literally says Zechariah 11 is the bill of divorce.

The Law was the only salvation given to the Jews.

Yeshua's name mean salvation, and was sent to the Jews....John isn't wrong on that...

It is just 'salvation doesn't come from the Jews', as they can't even teach the Law when God makes up a false religion for them to educate.

Simon Peter did not write the book of Acts. The Prophets say that no one can save another by his death.

Didn't say Simon did write Acts, was explaining that all the later church John, Simon and Paul didn't teach replacement theology, and how you're completely wrong, it was Yeshua who taught it.

The Prophets say that no one can save another by his death.

Think you're missing whom you're speaking to, completely aware Christianity is false, that is meant to happen; our topic was replacement theology.

That's Replacement Theology because Christians cannot be grafted unto the House of Israel without conversion according to Halacha.

It isn't exactly 'replacement' theology, that was the whole point in that dissection; Paul leaves Israel as a chosen people, whereas prophetically i would say they're no longer anything.

Yet clearly you don't even understand Paul in what you've just put, Paul claims circumcision is now of the heart, quoting from Jeremiah, and that the spilled blood is replaced by the blood of jesus.

No, it is not.

The covenant was clearly broken or it is saying God was a liar, when he said he would protect you in the land?

Clearly the covenant was broken before the 2nd temple destruction, and the diaspora took place....Which exactly aligns with prophecy, what Yeshua stated, and the historical facts.

 

[Ben Avraham]

Mark 13:10 And the gospel must first be published among all nations.

Plus he clearly explains how the false teachers will come, soon after he leaves.... So think he prophesied the deception of the New Testament precisely, as do the prophets.

Doesn't say Jews, it refers to anyone who would be persecuted for his name sake....

The Jews have been persecuted for rejecting God's laws and messengers; according to the prophets.

Seriously, and you want to explain the prophets to me as you're a child of Israel?

The Christians have all been led astray on purpose by Paul, John, and Simon the stone (petros), as declared by the prophets; they don't follow Yeshua currently, thus why would they listen to him?

This is the whole point, people don't follow the Law, they claim to follow a book; yet they don't care what the book says, they care about mankind's interpretations of what is required, without questioning....

Thus if they questioned Moses, they would see Christianity defiles the law in every way on purpose; if they questioned Yeshua's teachings, they would see how he fulfills pre-Messianic prophecy, yet people don't, they want to be told how to think.....

So the point in Luke is, even if someone came back from the dead, and reexplained it, people wouldn't listen, as they already show they don't.

lol, Ecclesiastes is made up rubbish; it doesn't come from Solomon, and has so many errors in it compared to the rest of the Tanakh.

Nope, completely the other way around; Paul literally states Israel isn't divorced in detail, and Yeshua literally says Zechariah 11 is the bill of divorce.

Yeshua's name mean salvation, and was sent to the Jews....John isn't wrong on that...

It is just 'salvation doesn't come from the Jews', as they can't even teach the Law when God makes up a false religion for them to educate.

Didn't say Simon did write Acts, was explaining that all the later church John, Simon and Paul didn't teach replacement theology, and how you're completely wrong, it was Yeshua who taught it.

Think you're missing whom you're speaking to, completely aware Christianity is false, that is meant to happen; our topic was replacement theology.

It isn't exactly 'replacement' theology, that was the whole point in that dissection; Paul leaves Israel as a chosen people, whereas prophetically i would say they're no longer anything.

Yet clearly you don't even understand Paul in what you've just put, Paul claims circumcision is now of the heart, quoting from Jeremiah, and that the spilled blood is replaced by the blood of jesus.

The covenant was clearly broken or it is saying God was a liar, when he said he would protect you in the land?

Clearly the covenant was broken before the 2nd temple destruction, and the diaspora took place....Which exactly aligns with prophecy, what Yeshua stated, and the historical facts.

Let's make a deal. You quote to me a single prophecy pointing to Jesus in the Tanach and, if I fail to explain to you what the prophecy is about I'll become a Christian as you are. Do we have a deal? If you agree with me, you must
reconsider your views if you prove to be the failing party.

 

[wizanda]

Do we have a deal?

Ok....

Since this is on topic, will ask about:

Zechariah 11 was fulfilled, when 30 pieces of silver were paid into the potters field in the house of Israel (a slaves price was paid for a messenger of God); thus the 2nd temple was destroyed as prophesied at the start of it.

Not heard a good explanation of who else Zechariah 11 applies to...?

 

[Redemptionsong]

The Pauline Paradox

When Paul started preaching about Jesus as the Messiah and son of God, he never realized that he had created a huge paradox.

You see, for Jesus to be the Messiah, he had to be a biological son of Joseph's, who was the one from the Tribe of Judah, whose Tribe the Messiah was supposed to come from. Mary was from the Tribe of Levi. She was of the family of Elizabeth, a descendant of Aaron the Levite. (Luke 1:5,36)

Since Jesus is also claimed to be the son of God, he could not be the Messiah, because God is not subject to human genealogies.

On the other hand, if Christians decided to grab the chance of at least to make of Jesus the Messiah by agreeing to drop the tale of the virgin birth, and to admit that he was indeed Joseph's biological son, he could not be son of God; and here the situation would get worse because even the doctrine of the Trinity would collapse.

That's indeed a huge paradox that can be accepted only by faith, which requires no explanation. But then again, where faith begins, knowledge ends. And for lack of knowledge, People perish. (Hosea 4:6)

Now, if there is anyone out there with enough wisdom to unriddle this paradox, I'll be more than happy to take my hat off to him or her. If not, the Sphynx will keep waiting patiently beside the Egyptian pyramids for the passers-by.

Good luck!

'What a word is this!' (Luke 4:36) Just a pity people prefer to live in darkness.

Jeremiah 33:17,18: 'For thus saith the LORD; David shall never want a man to sit upon the throne of the house of Israel; Neither shall the priests the Levites want a man before me to offer burnt offerings, and to kindle meat offerings, and to do sacrifice continually.'

Believers then, and now, do not want a man on the throne of Israel, they want the SON OF GOD, the true Messiah.

2 Samuel 7 [Whole chapter] Verse 5: [To Nathan] 'Go and say to my servant David: Thus said the LORD: Are you the one to build a house for Me to dwell in?'
Verse 14: 'I will be a father to him, and he shall be a son to Me.'

A man has a biological father, but the Son of God has a heavenly father.

 

[Ben Avraham]

'What a word is this!' (Luke 4:36) Just a pity people prefer to live in darkness.

Jeremiah 33:17,18: 'For thus saith the LORD; David shall never want a man to sit upon the throne of the house of Israel; Neither shall the priests the Levites want a man before me to offer burnt offerings, and to kindle meat offerings, and to do sacrifice continually.'

Believers then, and now, do not want a man on the throne of Israel, they want the SON OF GOD, the true Messiah.

2 Samuel 7 [Whole chapter] Verse 5: [To Nathan] 'Go and say to my servant David: Thus said the LORD: Are you the one to build a house for Me to dwell in?'
Verse 14: 'I will be a father to him, and he shall be a son to Me.'

A man has a biological father, but the Son of God has a heavenly father.

It happens though that Jesus as an individual, was neither the son of God nor the Messiah but, as part of the People of Israel, he was both. First the Son of God if you read Exodus 4:22,23 "Israel is My Son." Then, as the Messiah, you must read Prophet Habakkuk 3:13, "The Lord goes forth to save His People; to save His Anointed One." That's what Messiah is the Anointed One of the Lord aka Israel the Son of God. (Exodus 4:22,23) Now, how could Jesus not be the Messiah as an individual? Because the individual is born, lives his span of life and dies. Are we supposed to expect a new Messiah in every generation? Obviously not! The Messiah is not supposed to die but to remain as a People before the Lord forever. (Jeremiah 31:35-37)

 

[Ben Avraham]

Ok....

Since this is on topic, will ask about:

Zechariah 11 was fulfilled, when 30 pieces of silver were paid into the potters field in the house of Israel (a slaves price was paid for a messenger of God); thus the 2nd temple was destroyed as prophesied at the start of it.

Not heard a good explanation of who else Zechariah 11 applies to...?

You don't need a better explanation than the one found in Zechariah 11:7,14. It is all about the cleft in two of the unity between Judah and Israel. Regarding the 30 pieces of silver was only a plagiarizing from the 20 pieces of silver Joseph's brother sold him for. Though the gospel writer added ten
pieces of silver in the case of Jesus, it didn't help. It was still a plagiarizing of Genesis 37:28.

 

[wizanda]

Regarding the 30 pieces of silver was only a plagiarizing from the 20 pieces of silver Joseph's brother sold him for. Though the gospel writer added ten pieces of silver in the case of Jesus, it didn't help. It was still a plagiarizing of Genesis 37:28.

It isn't a plagiarization of Joseph, they didn't accidentally quote additional silver for no reason....

Sorry that explanation makes far less sense of what is written, and you're making stuff up to have it fit.

Zechariah 11:12-13 I said to them, “If you think it best, give me my wages; and if not, keep them.” So they weighed for my wages thirty pieces of silver. (13) Yahweh said to me, “Throw it to the potter, the handsome price that I was valued at by them!” I took the thirty pieces of silver, and threw them to the potter, in Yahweh’s house.

Matthew 27:3-10 Then Judas, who betrayed him, when he saw that Jesus was condemned, felt remorse, and brought back the thirty pieces of silver to the chief priests and elders, (4) saying, “I have sinned in that I betrayed innocent blood.” But they said, “What is that to us? You see to it.” (5) He threw down the pieces of silver in the sanctuary, and departed. He went away and hanged himself. (6) The chief priests took the pieces of silver, and said, “It’s not lawful to put them into the treasury, since it is the price of blood.” (7) They took counsel, and bought the potter’s field with them, to bury strangers in. (8) Therefore that field was called “The Field of Blood” to this day. (9) Then that which was spoken through Jeremiah (Zechariah) the prophet was fulfilled, saying, “They took the thirty pieces of silver, the price of him upon whom a price had been set, whom some of the children of Israel priced, (10) and they gave them for the potter’s field, as the Lord commanded me.”

The gospel writers make no reference of Joseph, instead it is a totally different narrative; which is prophetically precise.

It is all about the cleft in two of the unity between Judah and Israel.

When Zechariah wrote this, after the return from Babylon, there wasn't Israel anymore.....

So i don't understand what you're meaning that is an explanation, please go into detail how you think the covenant in Zechariah 11:10 was broken with all people, and give a historical timeline for this based on what is recorded?

 

[12jtartar]

The Pauline Paradox

When Paul started preaching about Jesus as the Messiah and son of God, he never realized that he had created a huge paradox.

You see, for Jesus to be the Messiah, he had to be a biological son of Joseph's, who was the one from the Tribe of Judah, whose Tribe the Messiah was supposed to come from. Mary was from the Tribe of Levi. She was of the family of Elizabeth, a descendant of Aaron the Levite. (Luke 1:5,36)

Since Jesus is also claimed to be the son of God, he could not be the Messiah, because God is not subject to human genealogies.

On the other hand, if Christians decided to grab the chance of at least to make of Jesus the Messiah by agreeing to drop the tale of the virgin birth, and to admit that he was indeed Joseph's biological son, he could not be son of God; and here the situation would get worse because even the doctrine of the Trinity would collapse.

That's indeed a huge paradox that can be accepted only by faith, which requires no explanation. But then again, where faith begins, knowledge ends. And for lack of knowledge, People perish. (Hosea 4:6)

Now, if there is anyone out there with enough wisdom to unriddle this paradox, I'll be more than happy to take my hat off to him or her. If not, the Sphynx will keep waiting patiently beside the Egyptian pyramids for the passers-by.

Good luck!

Ben Avraham,
Your reasoning leaves a lot to be desired, and shows a complete lack of understanding of the Holy Scriptures, 1Timothy 1:5-7, 2Peter 3:15,16.
Think!!! The Bible tells us that the Messiah would be born of a virgin, as a sign. Could a virgin have a child from a man, and still be a virgin?? Isaiah 7:14. Immanuel, he would be called, Matthew 1:23, and would be known as Joseph's son, Matthew 1:16, and also the son of God, as the angel Gabriel told Mary, Luke 1:32,33, no also notice that Jesus would reign over a Kingdom, forever.
Jesus was born in the tribe of Judah which satisfied the requirement that rulership would be through Judah, Genesis 49:10, Hebrews 7:14. Mary came from the tribe of Levi, who descended from Aaron, which satisfies the requirement of the Priesthood of Jesus, Hebrews 5:1-6. Even though God is not human, He is listed in the genealogical record at Luke 3:38.

 

[RabbiO]

Ben Avraham,

Think!!! The Bible tells us that the Messiah would be born of a virgin, as a sign.... Isaiah 7:14.

Short answer - No, it doesn't.

 

[metis]

Short answer - No, it doesn't.

Short response- You're right.

 

[Redemptionsong]

It happens though that Jesus as an individual, was neither the son of God nor the Messiah but, as part of the People of Israel, he was both. First the Son of God if you read Exodus 4:22,23 "Israel is My Son." Then, as the Messiah, you must read Prophet Habakkuk 3:13, "The Lord goes forth to save His People; to save His Anointed One." That's what Messiah is the Anointed One of the Lord aka Israel the Son of God. (Exodus 4:22,23) Now, how could Jesus not be the Messiah as an individual? Because the individual is born, lives his span of life and dies. Are we supposed to expect a new Messiah in every generation? Obviously not! The Messiah is not supposed to die but to remain as a People before the Lord forever. (Jeremiah 31:35-37)

Interesting. There's a lot there I agree with - but not your conclusion.
Let me ask you this: Who is your shepherd?

 

[ukok102nak]

~;> some people say
Think!!! The Bible tells us that the Messiah would be born of a virgin, as a sign.... No, it doesn't
and
some people also say
it will never happen that
a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son
without any realible truth unto the written words of god
for
The Scriptures cannot be discredited.
So if God calls people gods
(and they are the people to whom he gave the Scriptures),
coz those people before were destined for great things
in order to reveal the truth
behind the written words of god
as it was given by the Holy Spirit as humans spoke under God's direction.
They serve for stabiliment, propagation, and shade.
as it written
:read:
Matthew 1:19
Her shidduch, Yosef, being a tzaddik and not wanting to humiliate her publicly, planned to deal with the get (bill of divorce) in a private arrangement. MIRYAM VINDICATED AS AN AISHES CHAYIL
20 Now just when Yosef had thought through to this tachlis (purpose)--hinei!--a malach Hashem (angel of the L-rd) appeared to him in a cholom (dream) [see BERE**** 37:5], and said, "Yosef ben Dovid, do not shrink from taking Miryam in nessu'in (marriage) as your kallah (bride), because what has been conceived in her is through the Ruach Hakodesh.
21 And she shall bear BEN (Son) and you will call SHMO (his name) Yehoshua [trans. note: see ZECHARYAH 3:8; 6:11-12; NEHEMYAH 8:17; EZRA 3:8 where the TZEMACH or MOSHIACH is indicated by the personal name YEHOSHUA, which in Aramaic is YESHUA * ], because he will bring his people yeshu'a (rescue, salvation, deliverance) from their peysha'im (rebellions, transgressions)."
22 Now all this occurred so that which was spoken by Hashem through the Navi (prophet) might be fulfilled,
23 HINEI, HA'ALMAH HARAH V'YOLEDET BEN V'KARAT SHMO IMMANU-EL ("Behold, the Virgin * will be `with child` and will bear Son and will call his name Immanu-El" YESHAYAH

as they say
( humans who spoke under God's direction )
god the father had so many spirit that is within him
so as it is written
:read:
Malachi 2:15
Did he not make one, although he had the residue of the Spirit? Why one? He sought a godly seed. Therefore take heed to your spirit, and let none deal treacherously against the wife of his youth.

but
the father almighty god who created all
the good things in this reality
has a specific holy spirit that is within him
which he sent unto this world
:read: (as it is written)
John 14:24
He who does not love me does not keep my words. The word which you hear is not mine, but the Father's who sent me.
25 I have said these things to you, while still living with you.
26 But the Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things, and will remind you of all that I said to you.
27 Peace I leave with you. My peace I give to you. I do not give to you as the world gives. Do not let your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid.
28 You heard how I told you, 'I go away, and I come to you.' If you loved me, you would have rejoiced, becauseg I am going to theh Father; for the Father is greater than I.

now
if the father has a specific holy spirit that is within him
there is also a specific holy spirit that is within the
only begotten son of god
:read: (so as it is written)
John 20:21
Jesus said to them again, "Peace be with you! As the Father has sent me, so I am sending you."
22 After he had said this, he breathed on the disciples and said, "Receive the Holy Spirit.

thats why
it is the holy spirit who becomes
The Counselor, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things, and will remind you of all that I said to you.
remember always that this are the words of christjesus with his uncorruptable body the only begotten son of god
who is at the right hand of God, having gone into heaven, angels and authorities and powers
being made subject to him.
therefore
we must learn to understand all this things
:read: (and focus unto spiritual things)
Colossians 3:1
If then you were raised together with Messiah, seek the things that are above, where Messiah is, seated on the right hand of God.
2 Set your mind on the things that are above, not on the things that are on the earth.
3 For you died, and your life is hidden with Messiah in God.
4 When Messiah, your life, is revealed, then you will also be revealed with him in glory.
5 Put to death, therefore, whatever is worldly in you: sexual immorality, impurity, lust, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry;
6 for which things' sake the wrath of God comes on the children of disobedience.


:ty:




godbless
unto all always

 

[Ben Avraham]

Interesting. There's a lot there I agree with - but not your conclusion.
Let me ask you this: Who is your shepherd?

The gospel of Jesus aka the Tanach is my shepherd as it was to Jesus himself for 33 years.

 

[Ben Avraham]

Short answer - No, it doesn't.

Do you agree with the JPS translation of the Tanach? It is clear right there in Isaiah 7:14. "Assuredly, my Lord will give you a sign of His own accord! Look, the young woman (Almah) is with child and about to give birth to a son. Let her name him Immanuel." This happened when Israel fell at the hands of Assyria and was scapegoated eastward into Assyria. That's when HaShem rejected the Tabernacle of Joseph and confirmed Judah to remain for the sake of David. (Psalms 78:67-70; I Kings 11:36) So, the woman was Israel and the son born of her was Judah who was defined by name as being Immanuel. (Isaiah 8:8) Every thing metaphorically if you know what I mean.

 

[Ben Avraham]

Ben Avraham,
Your reasoning leaves a lot to be desired, and shows a complete lack of understanding of the Holy Scriptures, 1Timothy 1:5-7, 2Peter 3:15,16. Think!!! The Bible tells us that the Messiah would be born of a virgin, as a sign. Could a virgin have a child from a man, and still be a virgin?? Isaiah 7:14. Immanuel, he would be called, Matthew 1:23, and would be known as Joseph's son, Matthew 1:16, and also the son of God, as the angel Gabriel told Mary, Luke 1:32,33, no also notice that Jesus would reign over a Kingdom, forever. Jesus was born in the tribe of Judah which satisfied the requirement that rulership would be through Judah, Genesis 49:10, Hebrews 7:14. Mary came from the tribe of Levi, who descended from Aaron, which satisfies the requirement of the Priesthood of Jesus, Hebrews 5:1-6. Even though God is not human, He is listed in the genealogical record at Luke 3:38.

Yes, you do not understand because what you have in mind is "Bethulah" the Hebrew for a physical virgin who has never sexually lied with a man before. A virgin in the sense of a young woman can have a son and still be a virgin aka a young woman. In Hebrew, this virgin is called "Almah." Now, the Messiah aka Immanuel, Isaiah identified him by name as being Judah if you read Isaiah 8:8. The bottom line is that this prophecy of Isaiah has absolutely nothing to do with Mary and Jesus.

For Jesus to have been born in the Tribe of Judah, he would have to be a biological son of Joseph who was the one from the Tribe of Judah. But since Mat. 1:18 has Jesus born of God with Mary, Jesus was placed within the Greek concept of the demigod which is the son of a god with an earthly woman. If you want Jesus as the son of God, you can't have him as of the Tribe of Judah. If you want him as the Messiah, you can't have him as the son of God. It means, you can't bake your cake and eat it too. That's where the paradox resides.

 

[Ben Avraham]

1 - It isn't a plagiarization of Joseph, they didn't accidentally quote additional silver for no reason....

2 - Sorry that explanation makes far less sense of what is written, and you're making stuff up to have it fit.

3 - The gospel writers make no reference of Joseph, instead it is a totally different narrative; which is prophetically precise.

4 - When Zechariah wrote this, after the return from Babylon, there wasn't Israel anymore.....

5 - So i don't understand what you're meaning that is an explanation, please go into detail how you think the covenant in Zechariah 11:10 was broken with all people, and give a historical timeline for this based on what is recorded?

1 - The additional silver could have been a blunder committed by the Hellenist who wrote that gospel.

2 - Perhaps you are not aware that between the fall of Israel at the hands of Assyria and the fall of Judah to Babylon, about 10% from Israel, especially the Levites succeeded to escape Assyria to join Judah in the South. 10% of the whole of Israel, we may be talking about a few thousands who join back into Judah. This is recorded by Josephus in his book "Wars of the Jews" and also Prophet Isaiah in 6:13.

3 - They couldn't as it would be too obvious. The silence rather enhances the evidence of plagiarism.

4 - No, officially, there wasn't but 10% of Israel was present in Judah although Judah was the root of Jesse in power in the Government of one nation only. (Ezekiel 37:22)

5 - Zechariah said from God's inspiration: "I have two staffs; one of which I name Favor and the other Unity." (Zechariah 11:7) The staff Favor was Israel which was cleft in two. One is a reference to the 10% which joined the other staff Unity and the other 90% aka all the peoples were not worth more than 30 pieces of silver. So, God's covenant with them had been annulled. Then, the brotherhood between Judah and Israel had be annulled too. Hence, from then on, only one people aka one kingdom would exist. (Ezekiel 37:22)

# - I confess, it is a little tricky especially for you because of your wish thinking to fit Jesus into the equation but I see no difficulty, especially as the text helps somehow with Zechariah 11:14 that clearly identifies the staffs with being one Israel and the other Judah, just like the two sticks in the "hands" of God which became one stick aka Judah. (Ezekiel 37:19)

 

[Ben Avraham]

xxxx

 

[wizanda]

1 - The additional silver could have been a blunder committed by the Hellenist who wrote that gospel.

2 - Perhaps you are not aware that between the fall of Israel at the hands of Assyria and the fall of Judah to Babylon, about 10% from Israel, especially the Levites succeeded to escape Assyria to join Judah in the South. 10% of the whole of Israel, we may be talking about a few thousands who join back into Judah. This is recorded by Josephus in his book "Wars of the Jews" and also Prophet Isaiah in 6:13.

3 - They couldn't as it would be too obvious. The silence rather enhances the evidence of plagiarism.

4 - No, officially, there wasn't but 10% of Israel was present in Judah although Judah was the root of Jesse in power in the Government of one nation only. (Ezekiel 37:22)

5 - Zechariah said from God's inspiration: "I have two staffs; one of which I name Favor and the other Unity." (Zechariah 11:7) The staff Favor was Israel which was cleft in two. One is a reference to the 10% which joined the other staff Unity and the other 90% aka all the peoples were not worth more than 30 pieces of silver. So, God's covenant with them had been annulled. Then, the brotherhood between Judah and Israel had be annulled too. Hence, from then on, only one people aka one kingdom would exist. (Ezekiel 37:22)

# - I confess, it is a little tricky especially for you because of your wish thinking to fit Jesus into the equation but I see no difficulty, especially as the text helps somehow with Zechariah 11:14 that clearly identifies the staffs with being one Israel and the other Judah, just like the two sticks in the "hands" of God which became one stick aka Judah. (Ezekiel 37:19)

1 - Needing to make stuff up or claim others did to make sense of what you're saying, isn't logical.

2 - Alright so some of Israel came back, when were they then separated as Zechariah 11 is referring to? When was the whole nation destroyed as the text is also referring to? You're not making a clearer case for anywhere in history, and then claiming it fits better, when there are so many missing criteria in what you're saying, to fulfill what is stated in Zechariah 11.

3 - I posted you the text from Matthew 27:3-10, it clearly states what it is referring to; it has no reference to Joseph.... It clearly specifize it is about Zechariah by the criteria it mentions... Please stop making stuff up to have it fit.

4 - Alright so part of Israel came back, how does that make sense of what is stated in Zechariah 11, that the brotherhood shall be broken between them? How were they all meant to be cut off, if you're claiming it is at the time of Zechariah? When did they eat each others flesh?

Take into account on all the questions in number 4, they can all be shown clearly to fit with what Yeshua stated and what happened historically at the 2nd temple destruction.

5 - I'm sorry, that makes no sense, Zechariah clearly states the two staffs are not the nations, it doesn't state that...The staffs are symbolic of the grace and inheritance of the covenant being nullified, and thus broken.

It isn't tricky for me in the slightest, can systematically show logically why each line of Zechariah 11 fits with Yeshua, without needing to make up anything or having missing criteria....

Sorry yet what you have suggested so far isn't even logical; it has to claim tons of additional factors to make anything fit.

 

[Redemptionsong]

The gospel of Jesus aka the Tanach is my shepherd as it was to Jesus himself for 33 years.

If the Tanach were the totality of God's Word it might be possible to equate the two, as John 1:1 indicates: 'In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.'
A more direct and obvious answer might have been to quote Psalm 23 'The LORD is my shepherd..'
So, who is the LORD?
The Tanach answers this question. Ezekiel, writing some 400 years after David says, 'And David my servant shall be king over them; and they shall have one shepherd:' (Ezekiel 37:24)
So who is the shepherd? Is it David or is it the LORD?
Ezekiel provides the answer. Ezekiel 34:23: 'And I will set up one shepherd over them, and he shall feed them, even my servant David; he shall feed them, and he shall be their shepherd.'
Does this mean that the one shepherd must also be the Word of God?

Since Ezekiel is writing hundreds of years after King David he cannot be speaking about the temporal king. He must be talking about the everlasting king, the Messiah. It's interesting that the idea that David might 'return' to complete his mission is also found in Ezekiel's prophecy. David's tomb was in existence at the time of Jesus, as it is now. No one was claiming that David had been raised from the dead. Yet the evidence is that Jesus died and WAS resurrected, and subsequently ascended to heaven.
Acts 1:11; 'Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.'
This David will return!

To deny an individual Messiah is wrong. For there to be a people of God, a true body of Christ, there must first be an individual Messiah. The people are only one people because the Holy Spirit (the spirit of God in Christ) binds them together as one.