When was "the Messiah" first mentioned in scripture?

[Colt]

Are you looking for explicit biblical mention, clear mishnaic mention or traditional interpretation?

Basically, from a Jewish perspective when and where in the scripture did the Jewish people first develop the anticipation of the expected Messiah or deliverer that was common among the Israelites at the times of Jesus? I'm posing the same question to Christians.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

*** In Judaism when do they see the first revelation of a coming Messiah?

Please be aware, "messiah" is not a word we Jews invented. The term (משיח) does not mean "messiah." The use of the English term, messiah, by us Jews I think confuses the issues a bit.

If one were to speak English in a Hebrew/Jewish way the term "Future Davidic King" may be a better way of understanding the Jewish Tanakh basis.

The following may help you understand what I mean.

 

[pearl]

What abot Christians, where do you first see a specific reference to a Messiah in scripture?

For Catholics Gen 3:15 is one of the very few verses the Church has authoritatively defined as messianic.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

Basically, from a Jewish perspective when and where in the scripture did the Jewish people first develop the anticipation of the expected Messiah or deliverer that was common among the Israelites at the times of Jesus?

That is just the issue, no where in Israeli/Jewish or even Samaritan history or tradition is there a "messiah"/"deliverer" ever described. Those terms in English are of a Christian creation.

What is described in the Hebrew language, for thousands of years of both Israeli/Jewish and Samaritan text, culture, etc. is a Torah based leader of the nation of Israel.

The examples of this, described in Israeli/Jewish and Samaritan text, culture are the following.

1. Mosheh ben-Amram (who you call Moses) - if the Golden Calf had not been built he would have basically led the Israeli people to the situation where a (משיח) is supposed to exist. i.e. Torah based leader of the entire Israeli nation in the land of Israel.
2. Shlomo ben-Dawith (Who you call Solomon) - He was the (משיח) until he made a bad decision in his logic about what could accomplish the goal of bringing peace to the various nations he had contact with. Because he converted wives w/o the Mosaic court of his time and those converted wives did not keep the Torah and instead went back to the Avodah Zara they knew previously, Shlomo ben-Dawith was responsible for not directing this situation correctly and thus he was no longer the (משיח).
3. Throughout Jewish history there have been speculation of various individuals. The minute they fail or die it is not they are not the Davidic King who will turn the Torah based nation of Israel in the direction of a free kingdom with no external pressure to keep the Torah. If someone does some of the work, then we can say they have pontential. If they fail or don't complete the work they were not.

The first description for a potential leader of the entire nation being from the tribe of Yehudah (Judah) comes from Beresheeth 49:8 where it states.

Ya'aqov ben-Yitzhaq (Jacob), states that the leader of the Israeli people will be from the descendants of Yehudah (Jacob).

As you can see, conceptially Torah based Jews and Christians don't share a lot of commonality in this area. I.e. Jews and Samaritans have one concept that is more grounded in a societal type of reality where Christians have more metaphysical concept.

 

[Colt]

Please be aware, "messiah" is not a word we Jews invented. The term (משיח) does not mean "messiah." The use of the English term, messiah, by us Jews I think confuses the issues a bit.

If one were to speak English in a Hebrew/Jewish way the term "Future Davidic King" may be a better way of understanding the Jewish Tanakh basis.

The following may help you understand what I mean.

Thanks, understood. There were different schools of thought in Judaism about a Messiah, but I'm asking about the Messiah that the religious men in the Sanhedrin were asking Jeus about.



Jesus before the Council

66 At daybreak all the elders of the people assembled, including the leading priests and the teachers of religious law. Jesus was led before this high council, 67 and they said, “Tell us, are you the Messiah?” <---------was that expected Messiah a Christian creation?

But he replied, “If I tell you, you won’t believe me. 68 And if I ask you a question, you won’t answer. 69 But from now on the Son of Man will be seated in the place of power at God’s right hand.”

70 They all shouted, “So, are you claiming to be the Son of God?”

And he replied, “You say that I am.”

71 “Why do we need other witnesses?” they said. “We ourselves heard him say it.”

 

[Colt]

That is just the issue, no where in Israeli/Jewish or even Samaritan history or tradition is there a "messiah"/"deliverer" ever described. Those terms in English are of a Christian creation.

What is described in the Hebrew language, for thousands of years of both Israeli/Jewish and Samaritan text, culture, etc. is a Torah based leader of the nation of Israel.

The examples of this, described in Israeli/Jewish and Samaritan text, culture are the following.

1. Mosheh ben-Amram (who you call Moses) - if the Golden Calf had not been built he would have basically led the Israeli people to the situation where a (משיח) is supposed to exist. i.e. Torah based leader of the entire Israeli nation in the land of Israel.
2. Shlomo ben-Dawith (Who you call Solomon) - He was the (משיח) until he made a bad decision in his logic about what could accomplish the goal of bringing peace to the various nations he had contact with. Because he converted wives w/o the Mosaic court of his time and those converted wives did not keep the Torah and instead went back to the Avodah Zara they knew previously, Shlomo ben-Dawith was responsible for not directing this situation correctly and thus he was no longer the (משיח).
3. Throughout Jewish history there have been speculation of various

The first description for a potential leader of the entire nation being from the tribe of Yehudah (Judah) comes from Beresheeth 49:8 where it states.

View attachment 70624

Ya'aqov ben-Yitzhaq (Jacob), states that the leader of the Israeli people will be from the descendants of Yehudah (Jacob).

As you can see, conceptially Torah based Jews and Christians don't share a lot of commonality in this area. I.e. Jews and Samaritans have one concept that is more grounded in a societal type of reality where Christians have more metaphysical concept.

NOTE: The earliest and most important followers of Jesus were ALL Jews, not 4th century Roman Christians!

 

[Ehav4Ever]

NOTE: The earliest and most important followers of Jesus were ALL Jews, not 4th century Roman Christians!

I don't have any evidence about who they really were and what they were about. I only know that they Jewish element of their movement ended about two generations after they started leaving no indentifiable Jews who descended from them.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

Thanks, understood. There were different schools of thought in Judaism about a Messiah,

Actually, there isn't. Virtually, all ancient Israeli/Jewish sources agree on what a (משיח) and a Future Davidic King will be and do. Even the Samaritans share a very similar job description. Again, messiah is not our term it came from the non-Jewish world. There are a heavy differences between saying a "messiah" in English and saying a "Torah leader/Future Davidic King." A Torah leader/Future Davidic King is what virtually all Israeli/Jewish texts/culture is describing.

but I'm asking about the Messiah that the religious men in the Sanhedrin were asking Jeus about.

Jesus before the Council

66 At daybreak all the elders of the people assembled, including the leading priests and the teachers of religious law. Jesus was led before this high council, 67 and they said, “Tell us, are you the Messiah?” <---------was that expected Messiah a Christian creation?

But he replied, “If I tell you, you won’t believe me. 68 And if I ask you a question, you won’t answer. 69 But from now on the Son of Man will be seated in the place of power at God’s right hand.”

70 They all shouted, “So, are you claiming to be the Son of God?”

And he replied, “You say that I am.”

71 “Why do we need other witnesses?” they said. “We ourselves heard him say it.”

You will have to ask the NT gospel authors what they meant by the above statements. They wrote them, not the Torath Mosheh Jews of that generation.

I don't see any evidence that any of that even happened historically. Further, the NT gospel authors don't provide any evidence for how they would have known what was being discussed in a claimed event where they were not even present.

 

[Colt]

Actually, there isn't. Virtually, all ancient Israeli/Jewish sources agree on what a (משיח) and a Future Davidic King will be and do. Even the Samaritans share a very similar job description. Again, messiah is not our term it came from the non-Jewish world. There are a heavy differences between saying a "messiah" in English and saying a "Torah leader/Future Davidic King." A Torah leader/Future Davidic King is what virtually all Israeli/Jewish texts/culture is describing.



You will have to ask the NT gospel authors what they meant by the above statements. They wrote them, not the Torath Mosheh Jews of that generation.

I don't see any evidence that any of that even happened historically. Further, the NT gospel authors don't provide any evidence for how they would have known what was being discussed in a claimed event where they were not even present.

Ok, you are saying that there was no expected Messiah of any type at the times of Jesus. Is there an expected future Davidic type king or deliverer today in Judaism anywhere?

 

[Shaul]

Ok, you are saying that there was no expected Messiah of any type at the times of Jesus. Is there an expected future Davidic type king or deliverer today in Judaism anywhere?

You continue to use the word "messiah" even though it has been noted that the word is incorrect. That word is an English word which refers to a specifically Christian concept. The word "messiah" includes the concept of a figure that atones for others through a sacrifice of his person. By capitalizing the word, "Messiah", it makes it even more indicative that you are referencing a special particular person, most likely Jesus as believed in by Christians. That implies a divine Being. Since Jews reject such a concept and person, it is ludicrous to continue to ask Jews when the first appearance of a concept they reject occurs in their scriptures. This is different from the Hebrew word "moshiach" which simply means a person (or thing) that has been anointed. I would suggest that what you really are asking is when does the moshiach ben David occur? I suggest you should use "moshiach ben David" when asking for the Jewish sources of the Jewish concept.

The answer to that question is that the concept of the moshiach ben David is found implicitly in the latter Prophets. It is implicit, not explicit. It is developed more explicitly in the Talmud.

 

[Colt]

You continue to use the word "messiah" even though it has been noted that the word is incorrect. That word is an English word which refers to a specifically Christian concept. The word "messiah" includes the concept of a figure that atones for others through a sacrifice of his person. By capitalizing the word, "Messiah", it makes it even more indicative that you are referencing a special particular person, most likely Jesus as believed in by Christians. That implies a divine Being. Since Jews reject such a concept and person, it is ludicrous to continue to ask Jews when the first appearance of a concept they reject occurs in their scriptures. This is different from the Hebrew word "moshiach" which simply means a person (or thing) that has been anointed. I would suggest that what you really are asking is when does the moshiach ben David occur? I suggest you should use "moshiach ben David" when asking for the Jewish sources of the Jewish concept.

The answer to that question is that the concept of the moshiach ben David is found implicitly in the latter Prophets. It is implicit, not explicit. It is developed more explicitly in the Talmud.

I use Messiah as being synonymous with deliverer or Davidic type of king or moshiach. There are many vidios on the net of Rabbi's discussing the coming moshiach or Messiah. If the Talmud is a compilation of oral traditions from the centuries prior to Jesus then it would be relevant to the expectations in the times of Jesus.

Implicit is a good word! However, Jewish opposition to Jesus as Messiah is based on explicit citations of the scripture which indicates that there was an explicit expectation when Jesus was rejected? No?

It's a funny thing, these word games imply that it was all very murky but we are certain that Jesus wasn't! LoL!


NOTE: I do NOT believe that Jesus was the Jewish Messiah or moshiach that was "expected" in the age that Jesus was killed for in part, sort of adopting the position of moshiach ben David or Messiah, king of the Jews.

Jesus adopted the title "son of man" and the "Son of God".

 

[Colt]

...."Elijah the prophet will come introducing the Messiah". ~Tovia Signer~

 

[Ehav4Ever]

Ok, you are saying that there was no expected Messiah of any type at the times of Jesus. Is there an expected future Davidic type king or deliverer today in Judaism anywhere?

I am saying that the word "messiah" as it is often used in English and exclusive to Christianity doesn't exist in ancient Jewish culture nor Hebrew. The concept of a messiah you are familiar with is a Christian invention.

The possibility of a Future Davidic King, is not a deliver, as you have stated. They never were. Again, the deliver concept is also of Christian invention. The role of a Davidic King, in any generation, is to keep Torah (written and oral) and lead an already established Torah based Israeli/Jewish nation in the land of Israel and lead said nation. (i.e. inspiring the keeping of Torah, teaching Torah [written and oral], maintiaining the financial welfare and security of said Torah based Israeli/Jewish nation. That is with a functioning Torah based government in place including the Temple in Jerusalem and the Mosaic courts.

The ability for Jews to live in the land of Israel is a good start towards that process. The Jews living in the land of Israel returning to Torah (written and oral) is the next step of several that leads to the ability for there to be a Torah based (written and oral) Davidic king.

 

[Colt]

I am saying that the word "messiah" as it is often used in English and exclusive to Christianity doesn't exist in ancient Jewish culture nor Hebrew. The concept of a messiah you are familiar with is a Christian invention.

The possibility of a Future Davidic King, is not a deliver, as you have stated. They never were. Again, the deliver concept is also of Christian invention. The role of a Davidic King, in any generation, is to keep Torah (written and oral) and lead an already established Torah based Israeli/Jewish nation in the land of Israel and lead said nation. (i.e. inspiring the keeping of Torah, teaching Torah [written and oral], maintiaining the financial welfare and security of said Torah based Israeli/Jewish nation. That is with a functioning Torah based government in place including the Temple in Jerusalem and the Mosaic courts.

The ability for Jews to live in the land of Israel is a good start towards that process. The Jews living in the land of Israel returning to Torah (written and oral) is the next step of several that leads to the ability for there to be a Torah based (written and oral) Davidic king.

Thats your opinion, there are PLENTY of other Jews who do in fact see a coming Messiah and they use the term, Messiah. They don't claim that Messiah was invented out of thin air or that there wasn't an expected Messiah type of Davidic King in the age of Jesus.

Ironically after the enemies of Jesus had him put to death for claiming to be the Messiah (that you imply the Jews didn't believe in) the 2nd Temple and nation of Israel was cut down. Its more or less a museum.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

I use Messiah as being synonymous with deliverer or Davidic type of king or moshiach.

Those words are not synonymous and the rabbis you are speaking about below, also state that.

There are many vidios on the net of Rabbi's discussing the coming moshiach or Messiah.

And if you look at their videos they make very clear distinctions with what Chritianity believes a "messiah/deliverer" to be.

If the Talmud is a compilation of oral traditions from the centuries prior to Jesus then it would be relevant to the expectations in the times of Jesus.

The Talmud was compoed after the supposed time of jesus, whoever he historically may have been. The information compiled in the Talmud also covers time frames after the time supposidly the historical jesus may have existed. Also, none of the views in the Talmud about the future Davidic king are halakha. Further, none of them beleived in jesus.

Implicit is a good word! However, Jewish opposition to Jesus as Messiah is based on explicit citations of the scripture which indicates that there was an explicit expectation when Jesus was rejected? No?

Actually, the Torah based Jewish view is that the NT does not record actual history. I.e. the jesus that the NT authors talk about didn't historically exist. Thus, there is no rejecting anyone. Simply put the NT authors were more than likely influenced by either an individual or individuals and when said person(s) did not accomplish what he claimed the early Jewish Christians had to make something up to cover for why things didn't go the way they expected. Then when they were starting to fade away historically a few of them took their beleifs to non-Jews in the Roman empire who bought into it.

It's a funny thing, these word games imply that it was all very murky but we are certain that Jesus wasn't! LoL!

No word games. Simply put, the national and cultural langauge of the Israeli/jewish people is Hebrew. Always has been. The language of the NT and the early Christians was Greek. Hebrew and Greek have vast differences in linquistic history and cultural nuance. Further, since most of Christian history is made of non-Jews who did not know Hebrew and many of them not known Greek. What you have is Christian ideas and concepts on a hill and Jewish Hebrew based Tanakh and concepts/ideas in a completely different country and the other side of thirteen rivers.

The good news is that Jews are not trying to convert Christians to Jewish ideas. We are not here to be the thought police on such topics.

NOTE: I do

NOT believe that Jesus was the Jewish Messiah or moshiach that was "expected" in the age that Jesus was killed for in part, sort of adopting the position of moshiach ben David or Messiah, king of the Jews.

Jesus adopted the title "son of man" and the "Son of God".

Okay. I am going to let you in on a little secret. As far as most Jews are concerned, Jesus beleif can be whatever Christians want it to be.

Torath Mosheh Jews have a command from Hashem to stay out of said belief, no matter form it takes and what direction it goes in. Basically live and let live.

 

[Colt]

Those words are not synonymous and the rabbis you are speaking about below, also state that.



And if you look at their videos they make very clear distinctions with what Chritianity believes a "messiah/deliverer" to be.



The Talmud was compoed after the supposed time of jesus, whoever he historically may have been. The information compiled in the Talmud also covers time frames after the time supposidly the historical jesus may have existed. Also, none of the views in the Talmud about the future Davidic king are halakha. Further, none of them beleived in jesus.



Actually, the Torah based Jewish view is that the NT does not record actual history. I.e. the jesus that the NT authors talk about didn't historically exist. Thus, there is no rejecting anyone. Simply put the NT authors were more than likely influenced by either an individual or individuals and when said person(s) did not accomplish what he claimed the early Jewish Christians had to make something up to cover for why things didn't go the way they expected. Then when they were starting to fade away historically a few of them took their beleifs to non-Jews in the Roman empire who bought into it.



No word games. Simply put, the national and cultural langauge of the Israeli/jewish people is Hebrew. Always has been. The language of the NT and the early Christians was Greek. Hebrew and Greek have vast differences in linquistic history and cultural nuance. Further, since most of Christian history is made of non-Jews who did not know Hebrew and many of them not known Greek. What you have is Christian ideas and concepts on a hill and Jewish Hebrew based Tanakh and concepts/ideas in a completely different country and the other side of thirteen rivers.

The good news is that Jews are not trying to convert Christians to Jewish ideas. We are not here to be the thought police on such topics.



Okay. I am going to let you in on a little secret. As far as most Jews are concerned, Jesus beleif can be whatever Christians want it to be.

Torath Mosheh Jews have a command from Hashem to stay out of said belief, no matter form it takes and what direction it goes in. Basically live and let live.

That is great. One day you may be free to think for yourself.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

Thats your opinion, there are PLENTY of other Jews who do in fact see a coming Messiah and they use the term, Messiah.

Oh yeah. How many is plenty. Two or three messianics who claim to be Jewish? Can you show me some of this "plenty" who have written what you state in the Hebrew language and used the English word "messiah" to do so?

They don't claim that Messiah was invented out of thin air or that there wasn't an expected Messiah type of Davidic King in the age of Jesus.

Then they would definately be lacking in the historical linquistics and etymology area.

Notice how even in Late Latin Vulgate the English pronunciation messiah did not exist.

Ironically after the enemies of Jesus had him put to death for claiming to be the Messiah (that you imply the Jews didn't believe in) the 2nd Temple and nation of Israel was cut down. Its more or less a museum.

The NT authors sure try make that claim. Yet, their accounts are not acceptable historically and also the fact that the Catholic Church fathers chose what content went in or didn't go into the NT also makes its accounts something that Torah based Jews are supposed to ignore, based on Hashem's directives.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

That is great. One day you may be free to think for yourself.

Yeah, that day started more than 40 years ago. That is how I am able to do the following.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

The following may help.

 

[Colt]

Oh yeah. How many is plenty. Two or three messianics who claim to be Jewish? Can you show me some of this "plenty" who have written what you state in the Hebrew language and used the English word "messiah" to do so?



Then they would definately be lacking in the historical linquistics and etymology area.

View attachment 70630

Notice how even in Late Latin Vulgate the English pronunciation messiah did not exist.



The NT authors sure try make that claim. Yet, their accounts are not acceptable historically and also the fact that the Catholic Church fathers chose what content went in or didn't go into the NT also makes its accounts something that Torah based Jews are supposed to ignore, based on Hashem's directives.

Strange! Why isn't this common knowledge? Do you live in a cave somewhere? RF will only let me list 5. There are many many more Jewish Rabbi's and such discussing the coming of Moshiach or Messiah.