Who is Jesus?

[blü 2]

Forget your scholars/scribes.

When you acknowledge that the Suffering Servant is the nation of Israel and not Jesus, I'll consider it.

Do YOU believe David is speaking of himself, his nation or his Christ?

Dear oh dear, this wretched Christian nonsense of retrofitting! I accept as musicology rather than textual criticism the way Charlie Jennens strings them together for Handel's Messiah, but all this indefensible rubbish about Jesus being mentioned in the Tanakh belongs in Potterworld.

Only the prophecy I mention here often - that the Jews will return to Israel, most if not all of them.

That's not a modern prophecy. It's the pre-war political campaigning of Zionism.

Question 1: If the Jews are God's chosen people, where does that leave the Christians and their two thousand years of antisemitism?

Question 2: Why would God care even the teensy weensiest bit whether his People lived in sandy Israel or in New York? What purpose do you say is being served? It sounds like a magic potion that won't work if you put the toad's nose in before the goat droppings.

 

[PruePhillip]

When you acknowledge that the Suffering Servant is the nation of Israel and not Jesus, I'll consider it.
Dear oh dear, this wretched Christian nonsense of retrofitting! I accept as musicology rather than textual criticism the way Charlie Jennens strings them together for Handel's Messiah, but all this indefensible rubbish about Jesus being mentioned in the Tanakh belongs in Potterworld.
That's not a modern prophecy. It's the pre-war political campaigning of Zionism.

Question 1: If the Jews are God's chosen people, where does that leave the Christians and their two thousand years of antisemitism?

Question 2: Why would God care even the teensy weensiest bit whether his People lived in sandy Israel or in New York? What purpose do you say is being served? It sounds like a magic potion that won't work if you put the toad's nose in before the goat droppings.

Okay, I'll answer your questions, even though you deflected mine.
the Jews, Israel, the Temple etc are all SYMBOLS.
The Jews for instance are a symbol of GOD'S PEOPLE. In real
life they were not, mostly, but that's not the point. The bible made
this point often.
Israel is a symbol of GOD'S LAND, ie a home, a promise to the
people, the threat to withdraw from that promise, a blessing, some
thing to belong to etc.. And it is TINY. Because God says His
people are few, and their land tiny midst the great nations.

"Christians" as a generic term means as little as "Jew" meant.
It's not religions or nations, but individuals WITHIN these that the
bible refers to so often.

By Jews being in Israel rather than New York is therefore obvious,
the symbol of God's chosen people back in their Promised Land
has symbolic resonance.

ps David, like many other writers in the Old Testament, including
many verses in Isaiah, is speaking of the Messiah offering himself
to redeem His people. These verses are a reference to the cross.

 

[PruePhillip]

The first one may be the sheer naivete of the Moses story, with many scenes very much in the style of the marketplace storyteller eg:

Exodus 7:1 And the LORD said to Moses, “See, I make you as God to Pharaoh; and Aaron your brother shall be your prophet.
2 You shall speak all that I command you; and Aaron your brother shall tell Pharaoh to let the people of Israel go out of his land.
3 But I will harden Pharaoh’s heart, and though I multiply my signs and wonders in the land of Egypt,​

How dumb is that? Even before we get to to the notion that God needs Pharaoh's permission to leave? Or:

10 ... Aaron cast down his rod before Pharaoh and his servants, and it became a serpent.
11 Then Pharaoh summoned the wise men and the sorcerers; and they also, the magicians of Egypt, did the same by their secret arts.
12 For every man cast down his rod, and they became serpents. But Aaron’s rod swallowed up their rods.
​

God wants His people to leave for the Promised Land.
God hardens the heart of Pharaoh.

And one thing God wanted to show the people was that a sin offering
would be made through the shedding of the blood of a male lamb,
unblemished and beloved. This way every Jew could partake of the
sacrifice where his sins could be taken away - until the time of reformation
when all sacrifices are stopped, and the Gentiles would be the recipients
of God's grace through the blood of Christ. It's deep, and it's offensive.

It's not contradictory, God sought to show the Hebrews the power of
God's delivery. The only reason why the Jews are returning to Israel
today is obviously the same - it's showing Jew and Gentile alike the
reality of God and His promises. I take many stories about the 1948
and 1967 wars as examples - not of strategy but of the blessings
bestowed upon a people cursed for so long.​

 

[PruePhillip]

What Jewish relics in ancient Egypt, exactly? And anyway, there's no doubt at all that Semitic merchants traded with Egypt over tens of centuries. Jewish relics in ancient Egypt have to demonstrate the Captivity and/or the Exodus to have any relevance here.
But it may mean there's no credible basis for asserting that they exist at all.

Been reading about the fortifications mentioned in Exodus, in particular the role of
the gate or gates. That's interesting because in the Sinai Moses had fortifications.
Never thought about that before.

And work at Shiloh shows the priesthood was observing the law of Moses before
there was a monarchy in Israel, late Bronze Age. Not some Babylonian or Greek
fiction.

But this is interesting:
The Cohanim - DNA Connection

In a second study, Dr. Skorecki and associates gathered more DNA samples and expanded their selection of Y
chromosome markers. Solidifying their hypothesis of the Cohens' common ancestor, they found that a particular
array of six chromosomal markers was found in 97 of the 106 Cohens tested. This collection of markers has come
to be known as the Cohen Modal Hapoltype (CMH) -- the standard genetic signature of the Jewish priestly family.
The chances of these findings happening at random is greater than one in 10,000.

The finding of a common set of genetic markers in both Ashkenazi and Sephardi Cohanim worldwide clearly indicates
an origin pre-dating the separate development of the two communities around 1000 CE. Date calculation based on
the variation of the mutations among Cohanim today yields a time frame of 106 generations from the ancestral
founder of the line, some 3,300 years -- the approximate time of the Exodus from Egypt, the lifetime of Aaron
HaCohen.

 

[blü 2]

the Jews, Israel, the Temple etc are all SYMBOLS.
The Jews for instance are a symbol of GOD'S PEOPLE. In real life they were not, mostly, but that's not the point. The bible made
this point often.

No, the bible is perfectly clear ─ the symbol of God's people is male circumcision.

Israel is a symbol of GOD'S LAND, ie a home, a promise to the people, the threat to withdraw from that promise, a blessing, some thing to belong to etc.. And it is TINY. Because God says His people are few, and their land tiny midst the great nations.

If that's God's land, it's a symbol of thinking small. There was no obligation on the Jewish nation to have a low population; and Plan A was for them to have all the lands from the Nile to the Euphrates. A better Plan A would have thrown in Italy and France as well. And why not throw in Europe, India, Africa, the Americas, while you're there? What's the point of being Almighty if you can't do that for your own Chosen?

But God wasn't able to deliver on even his smaller promises. Hence two thousand years of pogroms, the Spanish Inquisition, the Holocaust ...

"Christians" as a generic term means as little as "Jew" meant. It's not religions or nations, but individuals WITHIN these that the bible refers to so often.

The Tanakh is clear that God's covenant is with the Jewish nation and no one else. The NT says if you don't believe in Jesus you don't get eternal life. Those are just two of the reasons I think your statement is untenable.

By Jews being in Israel rather than New York is therefore obvious, the symbol of God's chosen people back in their Promised Land has symbolic resonance.

Symbol shmymbol. You're ascribing to Yahweh a narrow, local, tribal, mentality without vision; as I said above, the sky's the limit.

God hardens the heart of Pharaoh.

Lines, lines! God hardened Pharaoh's heart so that Pharaoh would NOT let Moses & Co leave Egypt. The unambiguous inference is that Pharaoh, left alone, would accede to Moses' request to leave, thereby obviating the need for a magic showdown, plagues, divine murders, Red Sea partings &c. So God set all that up, murders included. Good thing it's only a very old folktale, hein?

And work at Shiloh shows the priesthood was observing the law of Moses before there was a monarchy in Israel, late Bronze Age. Not some Babylonian or Greek fiction.

So?

the approximate time of the Exodus from Egypt

That totally depends on finding what's presently lacking, evidence that the Egyptian captivity and the Exodus were more than just that old folktale.

 

[PruePhillip]

No, the bible is perfectly clear ─ the symbol of God's people is male circumcision.

Christians, going back to Jesus, see the Old Testament as symbolic.
Thus there's the:
perfect male lamb slain for the sins of the people
the Promised Land
crossing Jordan
dying within the borders of his inheritance
ark of God's presence
the wilderness life long journey
called out of Egypt
saved from the angel of death
offering up his only son
city of refuge
a tiny nation and few people amongst the nations
the holiest of holies
the veil of the temple
God's people
circumcision
etc
etc

All these were done so that all people of all ages and cultures might
understand what was done through Jesus Christ.- world or flesh
examples of spiritual intent.
This is not understood in mainstream Christianity as is shown by its
determination to restore the old symbolic worship.
And the bible says that circumcision or belonging to the Jewish people
of itself avails nothing.

 

[blü 2]

Christians, going back to Jesus, see the Old Testament as symbolic.
Thus there's the:
perfect male lamb slain for the sins of the people
the Promised Land
crossing Jordan
dying within the borders of his inheritance
ark of God's presence
the wilderness life long journey
called out of Egypt
saved from the angel of death
offering up his only son
city of refuge
a tiny nation and few people amongst the nations
the holiest of holies
the veil of the temple
God's people
circumcision
etc
etc

I don't doubt various Christians say various things along those lines.

But since the authors of the books of the Tanakh had no such notions, hence accordingly no intention of conveying such notions, that's no more valid than if I choose to read the Garden Story as symbolic of family sitcoms, or the Exodus as a prophecy of Trump's Wall.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Christians, going back to Jesus, see the Old Testament as symbolic.

That's the problem with misappropriation. They screw it all up.

 

[PruePhillip]

That's the problem with misappropriation. They screw it all up.

I have been reading the amazing account of the Messiah on the cross
in Psalm 22. David in his own experience wrote of the suffering Messiah.
Something his son Solomon never did. It's worth reading, along with
Psalm 69. Here we read the Messiah will be born of a natural woman,
live a life of sorrow and rejection, be falsely tried and crucified. But in
his resurrection he will look back with satisfaction as generations of
people, all over the world, understand that he has done this for them.

 

[PruePhillip]

I don't doubt various Christians say various things along those lines.

But since the authors of the books of the Tanakh had no such notions, hence accordingly no intention of conveying such notions, that's no more valid than if I choose to read the Garden Story as symbolic of family sitcoms, or the Exodus as a prophecy of Trump's Wall.

So, these "authors of the Tanakh", do they include Isaiah, David, Moses, Jeremiah,
Daniel, Malachi, Job and Zechariah? If so then who were they referring to when they
spoke of the lowly Redeemer coming and dying for our sins?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I have been reading the amazing account of the Messiah on the cross
in Psalm 22. David in his own experience wrote of the suffering Messiah.
Something his son Solomon never did. It's worth reading, along with
Psalm 69. Here we read the Messiah will be born of a natural woman,
live a life of sorrow and rejection, be falsely tried and crucified. But in
his resurrection he will look back with satisfaction as generations of
people, all over the world, understand that he has done this for them.

Psalm 22 and Psalm 69 are David's anguish. Neither is about the messiah.

This is so the typical thing of Christians seeing Jesus in the inkblots. It's like you guys wear glasses that have a Jesus painted on the lenses, so that you see Jesus everywhere you look. I'm sorry, I know I'm being a little scruffy, and should have more patience. But honestly, I get so tired of it. These are *our* sacred texts that Christians misappropriate and totally mess with.

I don't mind you being inspired by our scriptures. I just wish you all wouldn't create meanings that aren't there. It's just my pet peeve.

 

[PruePhillip]

Psalm 22 and Psalm 69 are David's anguish. Neither is about the messiah.

This is so the typical thing of Christians seeing Jesus in the inkblots. It's like you guys wear glasses that have a Jesus painted on the lenses, so that you see Jesus everywhere you look. I'm sorry, I know I'm being a little scruffy, and should have more patience. But honestly, I get so tired of it. These are *our* sacred texts that Christians misappropriate and totally mess with.

I don't mind you being inspired by our scriptures. I just wish you all wouldn't create meanings that aren't there. It's just my pet peeve.

So who YOU think David was writing about? Certainly it wasn't himself.
And while we are at it - who do YOU think Moses, Malachi, Zechariah,
Daniel and many others wrote about when they spoke of the coming
Redeemer of Israel who would give His life for His people, and believed
upon by the Gentiles?

 

[blü 2]

So, these "authors of the Tanakh", do they include Isaiah, David, Moses, Jeremiah, Daniel, Malachi, Job and Zechariah?

As far as I know, we have idea who actually wrote the books of the Tanakh.

It seems pretty safe to say, though, that they don't include Moses, Daniel or Job; and that if they include someone called Isaiah, he was only one of three co-authors; and that it's possible that David wrote poems, but whether he wrote any of the psalms is unclear, let alone which of them. As for Jerry, Mal and Zech, why don't you check where the historiography's up to, and let me know the current best expert opinions? That's what I'd do.

If so then who were they referring to when they spoke of the lowly Redeemer coming and dying for our sins?

Whichever quote you may have in mind, the overarching certainty is, "Not Jesus".

If you're in any doubt about that, check with any mainstream Jewish people of your acquaintance. After all, it's their book.

 

[PruePhillip]

As far as I know, we have idea who actually wrote the books of the Tanakh.

It seems pretty safe to say, though, that they don't include Moses, Daniel or Job; and that if they include someone called Isaiah, he was only one of three co-authors; and that it's possible that David wrote poems, but whether he wrote any of the psalms is unclear, let alone which of them. As for Jerry, Mal and Zech, why don't you check where the historiography's up to, and let me know the current best expert opinions? That's what I'd do.
Whichever quote you may have in mind, the overarching certainty is, "Not Jesus".

If you're in any doubt about that, check with any mainstream Jewish people of your acquaintance. After all, it's their book.

Well, if it's "not Jesus" then it begs the question - who is it?
Daniel gave a timeline, and stated that the enemy which
would destroy the Jewish nation would also destroy the
Messiah. This could be Bar Kochbar, but that doesn't add
up. And beside, the Messiah would come while the temple
still stands, so scratch Kochbar (Son of the Star.)

Maybe it was John the Baptist, last of the Old Testament
prophets? John was beheaded - David and Zechariah say
the Messiah will be "pierced." David adds, pierced in his
hands and feet. Being pierced with a sword in your hand
or feet might not kill you. And David's Psalm 22 reads like
the crucifixion scene in the Gospels.

Be wary of "expert opinions." Experts are constrained as
much as anyone else.

 

[PruePhillip]

As far as I know, we have idea who actually wrote the books of the Tanakh.

It seems pretty safe to say, though, that they don't include Moses, Daniel or Job; and that if they include someone called Isaiah, he was only one of three co-authors; and that it's possible that David wrote poems, but whether he wrote any of the psalms is unclear, let alone which of them. As for Jerry, Mal and Zech, why don't you check where the historiography's up to, and let me know the current best expert opinions? That's what I'd do.
Whichever quote you may have in mind, the overarching certainty is, "Not Jesus".

If you're in any doubt about that, check with any mainstream Jewish people of your acquaintance. After all, it's their book.

re authors. The experiences of the putative authors of the bible's book
have a grainy resemblance to their writing. Thus David spoke often of
the suffering of a rejected King which clearly couldn't have just been
himself. And Solomon who suffered little in his life never foretold of
the Messiah (?) but seemed taken up with his own wisdom.
Luke reads like a "Physician" and Matthew reads like a tax collector.
And of course, Jesus' favorite disciple John is a clear winner in the
stakes for who wrote the letters and Gospel of John. I am fine with
the authorships for most of these books. Arguing over authors, as
some church academics do, is just a way of not having to settle upon
what it is these authors are saying.

 

[blü 2]

Well, if it's "not Jesus" then it begs the question - who is it?
Daniel gave a timeline, and stated that the enemy which
would destroy the Jewish nation would also destroy the
Messiah. This could be Bar Kochbar, but that doesn't add
up. And beside, the Messiah would come while the temple
still stands, so scratch Kochbar (Son of the Star.)

Maybe it was John the Baptist, last of the Old Testament
prophets? John was beheaded - David and Zechariah say
the Messiah will be "pierced." David adds, pierced in his
hands and feet. Being pierced with a sword in your hand
or feet might not kill you. And David's Psalm 22 reads like
the crucifixion scene in the Gospels.

Be wary of "expert opinions." Experts are constrained as
much as anyone else.

Maybe it was some unnoticed person who redeemed the world, or at least the faithful of Israel, without any fuss on 1st October 937 CE.

Maybe it's had to be postponed because of unforeseen technical problems.

Maybe it's been called off altogether.

Or maybe it was never true, simply aspiration or idealizing.

 

[blü 2]

Luke reads like a "Physician" and Matthew reads like a tax collector.

I have no idea how physicians write about theology, or how tax collectors do. The two physicians of my close personal acquaintance each had entirely different styles of thought and taste in reading. What evidence do you offer?

And of course, Jesus' favorite disciple John is a clear winner in the
stakes for who wrote the letters and Gospel of John.

¿Ché?

The gospel of John was written about 70 years after the traditional date of Jesus' death, and, although more loosely, is also based on Mark for its biography. We have no idea who wrote it. (Too, the lover's tiff episode in Ch. 21 is downright weird.)

We have not the slightest reason to think that any of the NT authors ever personally met an historical Jesus.

What we know instead is that we have five distinct Jesuses.

 

[PruePhillip]

I have no idea how physicians write about theology, or how tax collectors do. The two physicians of my close personal acquaintance each had entirely different styles of thought and taste in reading. What evidence do you offer?
¿Ché?

The gospel of John was written about 70 years after the traditional date of Jesus' death, and, although more loosely, is also based on Mark for its biography. We have no idea who wrote it. (Too, the lover's tiff episode in Ch. 21 is downright weird.)

We have not the slightest reason to think that any of the NT authors ever personally met an historical Jesus.

What we know instead is that we have five distinct Jesuses.

Certainly five Jesus'. If my siblings wrote about our mother we would
have six mothers. I suspect John's Gospel was written as it happened.
He was the favorite of Jesus, a young man with no interest in theology
like Paul or history like Luke. You can see that in his later letters.
John's Revelations is the only book written after Nero.The earliest
other NT writing WE HAVE is about the mid AD 50's with Paul.
Matthew wrote about money things and Luke wrote technical, historical
things - his shipwreck account is famous to marine historians.

 

[PruePhillip]

Maybe it was some unnoticed person who redeemed the world, or at least the faithful of Israel, without any fuss on 1st October 937 CE.

Maybe it's had to be postponed because of unforeseen technical problems.

Maybe it's been called off altogether.

Or maybe it was never true, simply aspiration or idealizing.

Well, again, these writers say Israel will reject the Messiah as Redeemer
and lose their nation for a long time. But when the Gentiles time is fulfilled
the Jews will return to Israel. How would you explain such observations?

 

[IndigoChild5559]

So who YOU think David was writing about? Certainly it wasn't himself.

Of course David was writing about himself. Try reading those psalms again. David wrote many songs about his languish and lament about being surrounded by his enemies and cut off. He turned to God in his trials. That's why his psalms are so inspirational for us.

And while we are at it - who do YOU think Moses, Malachi, Zechariah, Daniel and many others wrote about when they spoke of the coming Redeemer of Israel who would give His life for His people, and believed upon by the Gentiles?

Goodness when you first started listing off X, Y, Z ABC, I thought you were going to engage in dumping-- barage me with a bunch of irrelevant scripture quotations that would give me a lot of busiwork. My response to dumping (in case you ever get tempted) is to only answer the first three and advise the interlocuter that I don't play that game.

But as to what you actually wrote, there is NOTHING said by Moses Malachi Zechariah, Daniel or any other in the Tanakh that talks about the Messiah dying for anyone's sins. If you want to claim it, you must prove it. Chose your very, very BEST example. I'll at least treat you with respect. If you dump, you will waste both our time.