If I was a conspiracy theorist, I might suspect you want me to concede that christ means anointed (even in some narrow instances) so that you (or somebody else on this forum - I'm not naming any names) can take that concession out of context and throw it at me some time in the future when I deny that messiah directly translates into christ.
But I'm not that paranoid. 
And I'm not
that dishonest.
Nah, all I wanted was a question answered. You seem to have explained your viewpoint well enough for that, though Shalom then stood up and answered that the two words
do in fact mean the same thing.
For the Greek-reading people of the time, whether or not the word's meaning of "annointed" was supported by events in the text (i.e. an actual instance of annointing) wouldn't really matter, as if
christos meant "annointed," it would read as "annointed" to them.
From what I know of this issue so far, anyway, I see no reason to squabble over whether or not
christos literally agrees with
moshiach. I feel no need to argue the case further, anyway, as 1) I have no obligation to do so, myself being agnostic; and 2) even if
christos does mean the same as
moshiach, it would not change whether or not Jesus was the "annointed one" he claimed to be, so bickering over definitions is pointless.
Author
Topic: Should Jews be thanked for rejecting Jesus? (Read 8871 times)