Topic: Do the Genealogies of Jesus Prove His Messiahship? (Read 2828 times)

Tony N · « **on:** March 05, 2006, 08:28:17 AM »

Below is an article first published in Unsearchable Riches magazine. Where "

nojc4me · « **Reply #1 on:** March 06, 2006, 10:31:56 PM »

Lineages prove nothing.
The only thing that could prove someone was the messiah is if he fulfilled the messianic prophecies.
Since they have not been fulfilled, we can know with a certainty that the messiah has not come.

Tony N · « **Reply #2 on:** March 07, 2006, 05:09:15 PM »

Quote from: nojc4me

Lineages prove nothing.
The only thing that could prove someone was the messiah is if he fulfilled the messianic prophecies.
Since they have not been fulfilled, we can know with a certainty that the messiah has not come.

njc, where exactly is it in the OT which states that every prophecy concerning the Messiah MUST be fulfilled WHEN the Messiah comes the first time?

shalom · « **Reply #3 on:** March 07, 2006, 06:34:19 PM »

Quote from: nojc4me

Lineages prove nothing.
The only thing that could prove someone was the messiah is if he fulfilled the messianic prophecies.
Since they have not been fulfilled, we can know with a certainty that the messiah has not come.

nojc4me,

Thank you for pointing out that lineage is not the real question. Jesus died before fulfilling any of the Messianic prophecies. I'm guessing there have been hundreds if not thousands of men who, simply by birth, met the biological requirements of Messiah. None so far have met the requirements.

Shalom

Tony N · « **Reply #4 on:** March 07, 2006, 08:43:33 PM »

njc wroteLineages prove nothing.
The only thing that could prove someone was the messiah is if he fulfilled the messianic prophecies.
Since they have not been fulfilled, we can know with a certainty that the messiah has not come.

shalom replied:
nojc4me,

Thank you for pointing out that lineage is not the real question. Jesus died before fulfilling any of the Messianic prophecies. I'm guessing there have been hundreds if not thousands of men who, simply by birth, met the biological requirements of Messiah. None so far have met the requirements. If anything, the lineage will help us (Jews) know if there is a powerful man who might otherwise appear to bring world peace. In other words, every one of the prophecies has to happen together - or we bury the man along with everyone's hopes that he might have been the one.

Shalom

Shalom,
I just don't get you and njc. Really, I don't. You really don't make any sense. If the genealogy doesn't mean anything then why is it a constant theme in the New Testament? The Messiah was to be of the seed of David. That is the theme of the OT and fulfilled in the NT.
Jesus died before fulfilling the Messianic promises?

You don't even know what those promises are so how can you say He didn't fulfill them?

You and njc really know how to take leaps of illogic.

You two really are a pain in the logic department. Really.

Tony

nojc4me · « **Reply #5 on:** March 07, 2006, 09:30:04 PM »

Tony ejaculated:

I just don't get you and njc. Really, I don't. You really don't make any sense. If the genealogy doesn't mean anything then why is it a constant theme in the New Testament?

A) It doesn't matter any more than why the Koran spends so much time discussing djinni.
B) It is one prophecy that the n.t. authors felt would be easy to claim and difficult or impossible to refute or disprove.
C) Its claim doesn't require any outward signs of accomplishment or effort on the part of the beneficiary of the claim.

The Messiah was to be of the seed of David. That is the theme of the OT and fulfilled in the NT.

A) Prove it. The best you could do is provide two contradictory lineages that each contain internal discrepancies and Biblical difficulties.
B) Prove first that jesus ever lived, then we can discuss whose brat he was.
C) Paul and John spoke of a man/god who simply appeared from nowhere, with no emphasis on lineage.
D) The n.t. also lies about other issues, so why believe the n.t. about anybody's lineage?

Jesus died before fulfilling the Messianic promises?

Yes, he did. Well, if he ever lived in the first place, that is. Prove he lived, then we can discuss if he fulfilled any prophecies before he died.

You don't even know what those promises are so how can you say He didn't fulfill them?

What makes you think we (speaking for myself and/or anybody else who can read) don't know what the messianic prophecies are?

You and njc really know how to take leaps of illogic.

Explain that, if you would be so very kind.

You two really are a pain in the logic department. Really.

Well, if you ain't got logic, then when somebody shows it to you, I guess that would give you a pain.
I apologize for paining you with logic.

Tony N · « **Reply #6 on:** March 07, 2006, 09:37:39 PM »

Just as I expected, you can only answer with rhetoric rather than substance.

What specific scriptures are there to prove that one is the Messiah.

Zagzagel · « **Reply #7 on:** March 07, 2006, 10:02:50 PM »

I think, that Tony has raised an important question, especially from the other side of the coin.....ONLY IF ONE thinks this IS important.

I have raised a sort of...kinda...same question..once upon a time..but it was lost in the archives.

Anyways...carry on...i will continue to read..and ponder.

G.

shalom · « **Reply #8 on:** March 08, 2006, 06:46:11 AM »

Quote from: geegee

I have raised a sort of...kinda...same question..once upon a time..but it was lost in the archives.

GeeGee,

What question did you raise that is now in the archives?

Shalom

Tony N · « **Reply #9 on:** March 08, 2006, 08:31:37 AM »

njc, don't answer my question with questions.

You are supposed to be the expert.

What specific scriptures are there to prove that one is the Messiah.
.
.
.
.

shalom · « **Reply #10 on:** March 08, 2006, 12:31:34 PM »

Quote from: nojc4me

A) Prove it. The best you could do is provide two contradictory lineages that each contain internal discrepancies and Biblical difficulties.
B) Prove first that jesus ever lived, then we can discuss whose brat he was.

Njc,

I totally agree with you that the geneologies of Jesus do not afford him the pedigree described in Tanak for Messiah, but I won't go so far as to say Jesus never lived. Honestly I don't know if he did, but to raise that question doesn't answer the initial question about geneologies and can set one off on a tangent that can be more emotional than sensible. Religion is an emotional topic. Not everyone can discuss differences without blowing a gasket and even worse, resorting to negative and deeply personal accusations. I am of the opinion that if you run with a skunk you'll smell like a skunk. <--- old Missouri expression I learned years ago from a well respected townsmen of a small, hillbilly community on the Arkansas border. Such wisdom does not come easy I recon.

The notion that the Messianic pedigree is 'proof' of Messiahship, is a small nail to hang one's hat. Many males have been born from Solomon's line (how many wives and concubines did he have? - check it out).. Where are they? Has any of them brought about peace and protection to Israel? Has any re-built the Temple? Has any been the instrument whereby mankind determines to live in peace? No? Then guess what - none of them so far are the Jewish Messiah.

Back to Pedigree: From my perspective and that of most Jews who look for an individual Messiah and not just a "Messianic age", the required geneology is clear. The man will be naturally born into the Tribe of Judah (Tribe association comes from the Father). In addition to the tribe, his lineage must pass back to David by way of Solomon. And he cannot be a decendent of Jechoniah. Neither account of Jesus' geneology met these requirements. One had him coming through Nathan (brother of Solomon) scratch that one. The other had him coming through Jechoniah. Scratch that one as well. And if one believes Joseph was not the biological father of Jesus, then that throws yet another wrench in the moter.

A word about adoption and cross tribal relationships. Clearly they happned. Mary's cousin was married to a Levite. Was Elizabeth born into the tribe of Judah? Who knows. But their children would be considered Levites- because of their father. Adoption allows for nearly all benefits of a tribe (land inheritance etc.) but it does not permit for a child who was not born a Levite - but adopted by a Levite - to serve as a priest. In Jewish communities today, the Cohanim and Levites are generally given the 1st Aliyah for Torah reading. If a child is known to have been adopted by a Choanim, or Levite, the child does not receive the honor unless the child was naturally born a Cohanim or Levite. The same direct 'tie to the loins' applies to the throne of David.

I've often thought that Paul warned against "discussing geneologies" because he didn't want to deal with the obvious problems created by the two accounts. Not that the Gentile Christains would know or even care - but the Jews who for a while followed Paul and the others, may have come to terms with the facts and Paul thought it best to keep that story quiet (I'm just speculating - there are no facts to backup what I'm saying). Furthermore, the belief that G-d impregnated Mary does not exempt one from meeting the requirements set by G-d, and recorded in our Tanak. Naturally, if one believes that G-d impregnated a virgin, then the notion that he must have the heritage I decribed is thrown out the window well before hand. That's why I say arguments are a waste of time and I won't engage in them. Most end up in "Lashon Hara" and I will NOT go there.

I wanted to address your comment and the general question of the thread in a non-emotional, non-confrontational manner. I am presenting the facts from a Jewish perspective. Nothing more. I don't think less of those who believe Jesus is Messiah, nor am I suggesting they need to change their beliefs. I support their right to believe as they choose.

On a different note, I find it disapointing that most Christians don't see the significance of Swaddleing Clothes (what Jesus was wrapped in ) and the possible relationship to Elizabeth. Likewise not too many Christians appreciate the signifance of the "term of service Zacharias served in the birth story, nor the timing of the visit of the angel to Mary where he said "your cousin Elizabeth is 6 months with child." As a Jew, those little tidbits say alot about what the Gospel writer was trying to convey. Unfortuantely the audience were mostly Gentiles and they too may have not understood the message behind the words.

Shalom

Tony N · « **Reply #11 on:** March 08, 2006, 01:34:31 PM »

Paul was writing about "endless genealogies" to Christians who were being influenced by Jews who thought that the believers of the nations could be perfected by doing the law in the provinces of Galatia.

Also, it is so amazing to me that Matthew and Luke would go to such pains to provide Christ's lineage proving he has a right to be Messiah and King if they knew in advance that those lineages didn't prove anything and in fact they would become the laughingstock of Israel if everyone could poke holes in them.

As said earlier, tens of thousands of Jews surely were not snookered by Christ's pedigree. This is not a matter of tablets by some angel Morony. This is about genealogies that could be checked by anyone. I have a nice article about the two genealogies if anyone cares to see it.

Also, being emotional is not always a bad thing. Really feeling strong about things be they religious or whatever can be good as long as no one gets hurt or their feelings hurt.

Still waiting on those scriptures njc.

Tony N · « **Reply #12 on:** March 10, 2006, 04:36:49 AM »

From a Commentary on Matthew's genealogy of Christ we have this:

This is the royal lineage of the Son of David as well as the title to the land granted to Abraham. In contrast to the genealogy given by Luke, we are given the actual physical descent by the male line to Joseph, the husband of Mary, the mother of our Lord. The three sections bring before us three distinct phases of rule and the failure of each. First we have the theocracy until David, which ended when the people clamored for a king (1Sam 8:6-22). Then comes the period of the kingdom, which was a series of failures, until the Babylonian exile. Since then the nations ruled Israel, until the birth of Messiah, when they were under the Roman yoke. It was a dismal descent, and proved conclusively that no male issue of this line would ever be competent to sit upon the throne of Messiah.
David was the greatest of the kings, yet his son Solomon was a living evidence of his terrible sin. And so degenerate did the line of his sons become that at the time of the exile Jechoniah drew down upon himself the curse of God:

nojc4me · « **Reply #13 on:** March 10, 2006, 10:05:03 PM »

On a different note, I find it disapointing that most Christians don't see the significance of Swaddleing Clothes (what Jesus was wrapped in ) and the possible relationship to Elizabeth. Likewise not too many Christians appreciate the signifance of the "term of service" Zacharias served in the birth story, nor the timing of the visit of the angel to Mary where he said "your cousin Elizabeth is 6 months with child." As a Jew, those little tidbits say alot about what the Gospel writer was trying to convey. Unfortuantely the audience were mostly Gentiles and they too may have not understood the message behind the words.

I'm intreagued. Please elaborate, as I have not been instructed on this matter.

nojc4me · « **Reply #14 on:** March 10, 2006, 10:30:17 PM »

Also, it is so amazing to me that Matthew and Luke would go to such pains to provide Christ's lineage proving he has a right to be Messiah and King if they knew in advance that those lineages didn't prove anything and in fact they would become the laughingstock of Israel if everyone could poke holes in them.

Perhaps they added the lineages because they knew a link to King David had to be established? Such a lineage would not prove he WAS the messiah, but without one, he certainly could reassonably be suspected of NOT being the messiah. To hedge their bet, the produced or manufactured their respective lineages. But they forgot to compare notes with each other - or didn't know about the efforts being made by each other along those lines.
By the time they wrote their fables, the Jewish State had already been crushed and the Jews mostly dispersed and completely humbled. Any protestations from the Jews would either be ignored or repressed by any means necessary. The anomymous authors of the books ascribed to Matthew and Luke had no reason to fear being made laughingstocks by the Jews; quite the opposite.

As said earlier, tens of thousands of Jews surely were not snookered by Christ's pedigree.

Sure they could be. There are millions more Muslims than christians. Surely, because there are so many of them, they must be right?

This is not a matter of tablets by some angel Morony. This is about genealogies that could be checked by anyone.

How was that supposed to be accomplished? According to christians, when Jerusalem was sacked, the Temple destroyed, and the Jews dispersed, the Temple Records were also destroyed. (At least, that is what I have heard the chrisatians claim. I don't know if they were actually destroyed.) Without the Temple records, nobody could prove his lineage. Or so some christians say.

Still waiting on those scriptures njc.

The ones that allow us to positively identify the messiah? I have posted those repeatedly and often, but always look foreward to presenting Torah truths. As presented by Messiah Truth, [http://www.messiahtruth.com/wanted.html], here they are.

JUDAISM'S MESSIAH – JOB REQUISITION

Position
Jewish Messiah

Job Description:
To usher in the messianic era, as foretold in the Hebrew Bible, and to preside over
the people of Israel as their king, sitting on the throne of King David.
Job Requirements:
To execute and successfully complete the messianic agenda, as described in the
Hebrew Bible, within one lifetime.
Prior Job Experience:
None
Qualifications for the Job:
The successful candidate will have attributes that must include, but not be limited to,
the following:

1. Be the seed (a direct descendant) of King David, through King Solomon (e.g., II
Sam 7:12-16; Is 11:1; Jer 23:5, 30:9, 33:15; Ezek 34:23-24, 37:24)
2. Be a spiritual and military/political leader (e.g., Is 2:3, 11:2; Dan 7:14)
3. Be married and have children during his term (e.g., Ezek 46:16-17)
Performance Appraisal Criteria:
The successful candidate will be expected to bring about certain conditions as part of
his sovereignty, though some will commence prior to his being identified as Messiah.
These must include, but not be limited to, the following:

1. Arrival of Elijah the Prophet (e.g., Mal 3:23-24 [4:5-6 in Christian Bibles])
2. Building the Third Temple in Jerusalem (e.g., Ezek 37:26-28, [also Ezekiel
Chapters 40-48]; Is 33:20)
3. In-gathering of Jewish exiles to Israel (e.g., Is 11:12, 43:5-6; Jer 16:15, 23:3; Ezek
37:21-22; Zech 10:6-10)
4. Reunification of Judah and Israel into one people (e.g., Is 11:13; Ezek 37:16-22)
5. World peace (e.g., Is 2:4, 11:6-8, Micah 4:3-4)
6. Universal knowledge of G-d (e.g., Is 11:9; Jer 31:33 [34 in Christian Bibles]; Zech
14:9)
7. Resurrection of the dead (e.g., Is 26:19; Dan 12:2; Ezek 37:12-13)

Tony N · « **Reply #15 on:** March 11, 2006, 05:57:38 AM »

Tony wrote:
This is not a matter of tablets by some angel Morony. This is about genealogies that could be checked by anyone.

njc replied:
How was that supposed to be accomplished? According to christians, when Jerusalem was sacked, the Temple destroyed, and the Jews dispersed, the Temple Records were also destroyed. (At least, that is what I have heard the chrisatians claim. I don't know if they were actually destroyed.) Without the Temple records, nobody could prove his lineage. Or so some christians say.

Tony's reply:
So you, by way of inference, hang yourself since you believe that the genealogical evidence was in the Temple Records.
Since the temple and genealogical records kept by the priests were still intact and Matthew and Luke had access to those LEGAL documents kept by those priests, we must assume one of two things: The priests were all a bunch of idiots that couldn't keep a simple genealogy or they took great pains to make sure each genealogy was correct and that therefore the genealogy of Mary to David and Joseph to David are correct.

Matthew Mark and Luke were written before 70 A.D. when Jerusalem was destroyed along with the temple. How do I know? The internal evidence proves it.
Matthew, Mark and Luke all make pains to show that Jesus foretold the destruction of Jerusalem. Yet none of them write that Jesus' prophecy was fulfilled. Therefore they were penned prior to that event.

As far as the genealogies are concerned, they are both right on the mark.

njc wrote to disprove Christ as Messiah:
3. Be married and have children during his term (e.g., Ezek 46:16-17)

Tony's reply:
Not talking about Christ, who is King of the Jews. This is just talking about the rites which were going on in Ezekiel's day concerning the priests and prince at that time.
In a sense though, we are of the Seed of Abraham since He (Christ) begot us though the Word.

njc continues:
1. Arrival of Elijah the Prophet (e.g., Mal 3:23-24 [4:5-6 in Christian Bibles])

Tony's reply:
Elijah the Prophet was not to be the Messiah but the forerunner to the Messiah which was John the Baptist.
Mal 3:1 "Behold Me sending My messenger, and he surfaces the way before Me. And suddenly, the Lord Whom you are seeking is coming to his temple, and the Messenger of the covenant, in Whom you are delighting. Behold! He comes! says Yahweh of hosts."

njc continues:
2. Building the Third Temple in Jerusalem (e.g., Ezek 37:26-28, [also Ezekiel Chapters 40-48]; Is 33:20)

Tony's reply:
Does it state that the Messiah must rebuild the temple?
Eze 37:26 And I have made to them a covenant of peace, A covenant eonian it is with them, And I have placed them, and multiplied them, And placed My sanctuary in their midst--to the eon."
Eze 37:27 And My tabernacle has been over them, And I have been to them for Elohim, And they have been to Me for a people."
Eze 37:28 And known have the nations that I Yahweh am sanctifying Israel, In My sanctuary being in their midst--to the eon!'"

njc wrote:
7. Resurrection of the dead (e.g., Is 26:19; Dan 12:2; Ezek 37:12-13)

Tony's reply:
Mat 27:52 and the tombs were opened. And many bodies of the reposing saints were roused,

Also, where does it state that ALL of the things you enumerate MUST come to pass all at the same time for one to be Messiah?

shalom · « **Reply #16 on:** March 11, 2006, 08:23:42 PM »

Quote from: nojc4me

On a different note, I find it disapointing that most Christians don't see the significance of Swaddleing Clothes (what Jesus was wrapped in ) and the possible relationship to Elizabeth. Likewise not too many Christians appreciate the signifance of the "term of service" Zacharias served in the birth story, nor the timing of the visit of the angel to Mary where he said "your cousin Elizabeth is 6 months with child." As a Jew, those little tidbits say alot about what the Gospel writer was trying to convey. Unfortuantely the audience were mostly Gentiles and they too may have not understood the message behind the words.

I'm intreagued. Please elaborate, as I have not been instructed on this matter.

When I first read the Gospel of Luke these two points stood out. Since then I've read both support and disagreement. Be that as it may, I've not read or heard many Christian preachers address these points. Maybe its not important - or may be the Gentile doesn't read Luke the same way a Jew does? Don't know.

But here are my thoughts:

The term Swadling Cloths (as I understand it in the greek = sparango'o) means strips of cloth. The verse seem strange (to me), was it the custom to wrap a newborn in strips or was there a purpose for Luke writing that? I think it very possible that it was a 'message'. Priests at the temple wore linen white tunics. Jewish history reports that these garments were not washed, and when they became soiled, they were torn into strips and used as wicks for the Menorah. Where would Mary get the strips? Guess who? Elizabeth whose husband Zacharias, was a priest. The point is that Luke has Jesus wrapped in priestly garments from the moment of his birth. BTW: The Highpriest only wore white on Yom Kippur. His garment was not destroyed when it was soiled - it was buried so that no one could ever wear it or use it for another purpose. Zacharias on the other hand would have had a closet full of white tunics and I'm confident a basket full of soiled ones.

Luke also makes it a point to mention Abijah - the rotation to which Zacharias was assigned. If one believes nothing is written just by chance, then why did Luke mention the rotation cycle? And why did Luke mention that the angel spoke to Mary 6 months after she conceived? Again, I think there is a hidden message - not hidden to the Jewish reader, but overlooked perhaps by a Gentile who his not familiar with Jewish culture and in this case, Temple service.

In Chronicals I the tribe of Levi was divided by household. Each household was assigned a weekly rotation for temple service. The rotation name was that of the household. The Hebrew calendar is mainly lunar, but even so, during most years, each household had two rotations. Abijah was such a rotation. In addition to their normal roations, all priests served at the temple during the 3 high festivals. The first occurance of the rotation of Abija in a Hebrew year, happens right before Shavuot (one of these 3 high festivals). Shavout is the celebration of receiving Torah at Sinai. It is called Pentecost in the Christian Scriptures. Zachariah would have been in the temple for 2 weeks (one for his service the other for Shavout). There is nothing to say that when he didn't go home, his wife conceived. When the angel came to Mary, he said Elizabeth was 6 months pregenant. 6 months after Shavout is Hanukkah (the festival of lights). 9 months after Hanuakkah is Sukkoth (The feats of Booths - Tabernacles). John makes it a point to call Jesus the "light of the word", and also refers to the "word was made flesh and 'tabernacled" with us." - A possible reference to Jesus' conception and birth (during Tabernacels)? Don't know - but I think it possible. Sukkoth is a fall festival, just after Rosh Hashana and Yom Kippur. It occurs usually Sept-Oct.

Personally, I think there is a very strong possibility that both Luke and John were making a point - a point that I don't see being talked about much in Christian circles.

Shalom

Tony N · « **Reply #17 on:** March 11, 2006, 09:06:02 PM »

Excellent thoughts, Shalom.

Zagzagel · « **Reply #18 on:** March 11, 2006, 09:25:09 PM »

Quote

GeeGee,

What question did you raise that is now in the archives?

Shalom

I forget which thread it was in, but it had to do with why Matthews geneology was different than Lukes account.

Quote

Personally, I think there is a very strong possibility that both Luke and John were making a point - a point that I don't see being talked about much in Christian circles.

I definately agree with you that many approach the scriptures with a gentiles frame of mind...and so miss all those little clues in the NT writings.

G.

nojc4me · « **Reply #19 on:** March 11, 2006, 10:20:27 PM »

Tony N said:

So you, by way of inference, hang yourself since you believe that the genealogical evidence was in the Temple Records.

Hardly. I was pointing out the inconsistency in your own argument: YOU think there's some magical value in the Temple records, not I. You claimed the Jews didn't refute the lineages of jesus, so, according to you, they must be true. Since those lineages date from AFTER the destruction of the Temple, there would be no way to confirm or refute the n.t. lineages as according to your own standards of evidence; that is, by the Temple records.
To your way of thinking, a man has no way of proving his lineage without the Temple records, yet you claim they could, because they allegedly did so after the Temple was destroyed.
I have consistently maintained that a man knows his own lineage, and can back his claim up with corroboration from his elders and contemporaries, even those not of his own family. We probably don't need the Temple records to know who is descended from King David.

Since the temple and genealogical records kept by the priests were still intact and Matthew and Luke had access to those LEGAL documents kept by those priests, we must assume one of two things: The priests were all a bunch of idiots that couldn't keep a simple genealogy or they took great pains to make sure each genealogy was correct and that therefore the genealogy of Mary to David and Joseph to David are correct.

There's a third option, at least: The whole assumption is made up by you, and never took place at all.
Matthew does not predate 70 c.e. (See below). Therefore, the Temple records were (according to christians), already destroyed.
Mark 7:2: (KJV) "And when they saw some of his disciples eat bread with defiled, that is to say, with unwashen, hands, they found fault. 3 For the Pharisees, and all the Jews, except they wash their hands oft, eat not, holding the tradition of the elders,"
The author of Mark is giving away the date of composition here (after 70 CE).
According to Rabbinic literature, prior to the destruction of the 1st Temple it was decreed that only Priests were required to wash before they ate. Not until after the destruction of the 2nd Temple did Rabbinic Law apply to for all Jews to wash their hands before meals. See "Rambam Yad hachazake Trumos ch 11 & 12."
Matthew, being based upon "Mark," "Matthew" copied Mark's error, so that means Mark must also be from days after the destruction of Jerusalem.

Matthew Mark and Luke were written before 70 A.D. when Jerusalem was destroyed along with the temple. How do I know? The internal evidence proves it.

You must have missed Mark 7:2: before you wrote the tidbit above. Oh well. Nobody's perfect.

Matthew, Mark and Luke all make pains to show that Jesus foretold the destruction of Jerusalem. Yet none of them write that Jesus' prophecy was fulfilled. Therefore they were penned prior to that event.

There's no reason to accept your claim that the gospels were written before the destruction of the Temple due to the texts of the gospels themselves, and so the 'prophecies' of the destruction of the Temple lose some of their impressiveness, coming after the fact as they do.

As far as the genealogies are concerned, they are both right on the mark.

Nope, sorry. They contain a few glaring errors, and so their reliability must be questioned.

njc wrote to disprove Christ as Messiah:
3. Be married and have children during his term (e.g., Ezek 46:16-17)

Tony's reply:
Not talking about Christ, who is King of the Jews.

"Christ" is a Greek word that, according to the way it is used in the n.t. means,
"messiah," a definition the alleged meassiah rejected (Mark 12:35,);
"a king," which Jc was not;
"the son of David," perversely, a definition that jesus rejected;
"a miracle worker - fortune teller," which Jc may have been, but in the Tanakh there is no connection between that definition and the messiah;
"savior," but in the Tanakh there is no association with the messiah and a savior, since G-d is the Savior, and Jc wasn't G-d;
"a sufferer," apparently a surrogate sufferer;
"eternal," but that's based on a false reading of the Hebrew Holy Scriptures.
"Messiah" is the Anglicized version of a Hebrew word meaning "anointed." One was anointed with the Holy Oil of Anointing for one of three offices: prophet, priest, and/or King.
The king, then would be "messiah."
Since jesus was never anointed with the Holy Oil of Anointing, he was not the messiah.
And since his lineage is in doubt (if for no other reason than because there are TWO of them provided in the n.t., and the contradict each other), then there's no reason to assume jesus was entitled to the term, "king of the Jews."
Besides the lineages, the dogma of the christians teaches that Joseph was not the father of jesus, but jesus was in stead the 'son of god,' and since God is not descended from David, then jesus, the so-called 'son of god' was also not descended from David.
So there's no reason to accept the claim that jesus was "king of the Jews."
Finally, jesus may have claim to the title "christ," but he was NOT the messiah.

njc continues:
1. Arrival of Elijah the Prophet (e.g., Mal 3:23-24 [4:5-6 in Christian Bibles])

Tony's reply:
Elijah the Prophet was not to be the Messiah but the forerunner to the Messiah which was John the Baptist.

John the Baptist flatly denied he was the forerunner OR Elijah. Therefore, your claim is at variance with the "best evidence." Who should we believe, the new testament, or what you claim the new testament says or means?
Since John the Baptist is the ONLY person offered as the returned "Elijah" or the messiah's forerunner, but wasn't Elijah; and since nobody else is claimed to have been Elijah, then Elijah has not come, and that means the messiah has not come.

Mal 3:1 "Behold Me sending My messenger, and he surfaces the way before Me."

The expression, "My messenger," is given as "Malachai," which is the name of the author of the book you cited. Quite possibly, Malachai was talking of himself. He paved the road by giving us a forerunner to look for before the coming of the messiah himself.
Note also that this forerunner's task was to mend families, whereas jesus said that his task was to divide families!
Since God wants families mended, but jesus wanted families divided, we can tell right away that jesus was not doing God's Will.
Therefore, jesus was not the messiah, but an anti-messiah. (Here, 'ant-' can mean both "against" and "before.")

njc continues:
2. Building the Third Temple in Jerusalem (e.g., Ezek 37:26-28, [also Ezekiel Chapters 40-48]; Is 33:20)

Tony's reply:
Does it state that the Messiah must rebuild the temple?

Yes, it does.

njc wrote:
7. Resurrection of the dead (e.g., Is 26:19; Dan 12:2; Ezek 37:12-13)

Tony's reply:
Mat 27:52 and the tombs were opened. And many bodies of the reposing saints were roused,

That is myth. No historian of the day ever recounted the citizens of ANY city (much less a specific city, say Jerusalem, for example), experiencing the opening of hundreds or even thousands of graves and the dead streaming therefrom to walk the Earth again. Who were these resurrected dead? What are their names? Did they retuurn to life bodily, or simply as shades or ghosts? Did they return to their wives and husbands, some of whom didn't need to crawl out of the tomb? Did they need to eat? If so, did they return to their former jobs? Did they stay resurrected? Are they still walking the Earth today? What are their addresses? Did the arise just to die again? Did they ascend into heaven, presumably before jesus did? If so, what path did jesus blaze?
This incredible event (the alleged mass resurrection), which if it HAD happened, would have made the headlines all over the civilized world, but is passed off with but one line in a single gospel (none of the others seem to have remembered it happening, or they also would have mentioned it), and the 'resurrected' simply vanish like the morning mist!
It's only reasonable to suspect it is mere myth.

Also, where does it state that ALL of the things you enumerate MUST come to pass all at the same time for one to be Messiah?

Maimonides wrote about it. He cited Scripture and gave good reason for the belief. That's good enough.
"If he (the one assumed to be messiah) did not succeed to this degree or he was killed, he surely is not [the redeemer] promised by the Torah. [Rather,] he should be considered as all the other proper and legitimate kings of the Davidic dynasty who died. *&$ G-d only caused him to arise in order to test the multitude. As it is written [Daniel 11:35], "Some of the wise men will stumble, to purge, to refine, and to clarify, until the appointed time, for it is yet to come."
______
*&$ The key here is, "to this degree" which level of performance jesus did not even approach, besides the fact that his Davidic descent is in serious doubt.

Author Topic: Do the Genealogies of Jesus Prove His Messiahship? (Read 2828 times)