Could it be perhaps a misinterpretation of the original Hebrew? Do you know Hebrew

 

No don't know Hebrew but I know the King of the Jews and they were looking for the conquering king messiah not the suffering messiah. The suffering side of the prophesies have happened and now we and they are waitng for the mighty king side of prophecy to be fulfilled. Sooner than anyone thinks they will find Him and know the whole story.

The whole OT is pointing to Jesus on the cross dying for our sins. The spotless lamb.

 

I am not discounting that some OT passages point to Jesus.

 

What I am saying is that it is better to delve into specifics rather than generalities.

 

Whereas you tell me the whole OT is pointing I can agree that the themes of the OT are revelations that lead to Christ, to say "the whole OT" is to be so general that we go looking for every verse to be prophetic when in fact they aren't and in some ways we do violence to Scripture by forcing them to fit that kind of agenda.

No don't know Hebrew but I know the King of the Jews and they were looking for the conquering king messiah not the suffering messiah. The suffering side of the prophesies have happened and now we and they are waitng for the mighty king side of prophecy to be fulfilled. Sooner than anyone thinks they will find Him and know the whole story.

 

The Scriptures mention nothing of a second coming. The Messiah was not supposed to be divine.

I am not discounting that some OT passages point to Jesus.

 

What I am saying is that it is better to delve into specifics rather than generalities.

 

Whereas you tell me the whole OT is pointing I can agree that the themes of the OT are revelations that lead to Christ, to say "the whole OT" is to be so general that we go looking for every verse to be prophetic when in fact they aren't and in some ways we do violence to Scripture by forcing them to fit that kind of agenda.

 

Didn't mean every scripture but like you say "themes". The Law was just so almost impossible to keep righteous with so many rules and regulations and standards, and when a person sinned there had to be blood covering or cleansing and just like when Abraham took Isaac up on the mount to sacrifice him to the Lord, God provided the sacrifice, just like He did when Jesus came here for all humanity.

The Scriptures mention nothing of a second coming. The Messiah was not supposed to be divine.

 

Daniel 2:44-45, Daniel 7:14

 

If you believe Jesus was the suffering Messiah of Isaiah 53 you will find him conquering King in Zechariah 14.

JOHN 1:1 "In the beginning was the WORD, and the WORD was with God. and the WORD was God. "HE" was was with God in the BEGINNING.

 

I'm not gonna list all the verses of the OT as others have. But here is a few.

 

"Seed of David...Psalms 132: Fulfilled Acts 13:23

 

"Being born in Bethlehem....Micah 5:2 Fullfilled Luke 2:4:6

 

"Preceded by John the Baptist....Isaiah 40:3 Fullfilled Matthew :1

 

" A bone will not be broken....Psalms 34:20 Fullfilled John 19:33

Its a LONG ONE.......

 

WHY DON'T JEWS BELIEVE IN JESUS?

 

The comments of the Rabbi sound just like they did in the days of Jesus. And its kind of funny that Christianity was born in Israel and first spread all over the world by Jews. People who had contact with God in the person of a man. He turned the world upside down. And in Zechariah 12:10 God is going to pour out grace upon Israel and show Jesus to them and they will then know.

One interesting quote from the original post is:

 

DESCENDENT OF DAVID

"The Messiah must be descended on his father's side from King David (see Genesis 49:10 and Isaiah 11:1). According to the Christian claim that Jesus was the product of a virgin birth, he had no father--and thus could not have possibly fulfilled the messianic requirement of being descended on his father's side from King David."

 

Does anyone have any comments on this quote? Are his points valid? or not?

Nice post. Of the big three religions, Judaism is easily the religion I'm the least familiar with. I wish more religions would follow the bolded ideas.

 

6) JEWS AND GENTILES

Judaism does not demand that everyone convert to the religion. The Torah of Moses is a truth for all humanity, whether Jewish or not. King Solomon asked God to heed the prayers of non-Jews who come to the Holy Temple (Kings I 8:41-43). The prophet Isaiah refers to the Temple as a "House for all nations."

The Temple service during Sukkot featured 70 bull offerings, corresponding to the 70 nations of the world. The Talmud says that if the Romans would have realized how much benefit they were getting from the Temple, they'd never have destroyed it.

Jews have never actively sought converts to Judaism because the Torah prescribes a righteous path for gentiles to follow, known as the "Seven Laws of Noah." Maimonides explains that any human being who faithfully observes these basic moral laws earns a proper place in heaven.

I dont see anyone coming up with a viable defense to the above Points that I have posted.

 

Gooch, for the life of me I can't understand what kind of ministry you are studying for, please tell us what denomination you follow.

As far as the points you have posted from the Rabbi, who in my opinion is no more than a Pharisee, there has been several responses that would prove him wrong. The problem is that like the Pharisees 2000 years ago, he is picking and choosing the scriptures he wants to follow.

He is right, the prophets never mentioned a second coming, but they did several times reveal the birth of the Messiah, Micah 5:2, Daniel 9:25, and Isaiah 7:14.

The prophets told about a forerunner, Isaiah 40:3-5, Malachi 3:1and 4:5 and 6.

His ministries, Isaiah 9:1 and 2, Isaiah 61: 1 and 2, Zechariah 9:9

His betrayal, Zechariah 11:12 (even down to the exact pieces of silver).

His murder, Isaiah 53:5 and 12, Zechariah 12:10.

And his burial Isaiah 53:9.

This is all done by using only the prophets the Rabbi has mentioned to prove his points. If you then throw in the prophesies from Psalms, it is even more clear.

The second coming of Jesus was told by Jesus himself and John in Revelations.

Also another variable the Rabbi has not taken into consideration is the truth of Jesus Christ revealed to me and millions of others by the Holy Spirit. Like the Pharisees, he along with the rest of his brood, don’t think God will speak to us, the Gentiles.

The Rabbi and anyone who holds his beliefs are still wandering in the desert.

Gooch, for the life of me I can't understand what kind of ministry you are studying for, please tell us what denomination you follow.

As far as the points you have posted from the Rabbi, who in my opinion is no more than a Pharisee, there has been several responses that would prove him wrong. The problem is that like the Pharisees 2000 years ago, he is picking and choosing the scriptures he wants to follow.

He is right, the prophets never mentioned a second coming, but they did several times reveal the birth of the Messiah, Micah 5:2, Daniel 9:25, and Isaiah 7:14.

The prophets told about a forerunner, Isaiah 40:3-5, Malachi 3:1and 4:5 and 6.

His ministries, Isaiah 9:1 and 2, Isaiah 61: 1 and 2, Zechariah 9:9

His betrayal, Zechariah 11:12 (even down to the exact pieces of silver).

His murder, Isaiah 53:5 and 12, Zechariah 12:10.

And his burial Isaiah 53:9.

This is all done by using only the prophets the Rabbi has mentioned to prove his points. If you then throw in the prophesies from Psalms, it is even more clear.

The second coming of Jesus was told by Jesus himself and John in Revelations.

Also another variable the Rabbi has not taken into consideration is the truth of Jesus Christ revealed to me and millions of others by the Holy Spirit. Like the Pharisees, he along with the rest of his brood, don’t think God will speak to us, the Gentiles.

The Rabbi and anyone who holds his beliefs are still wandering in the desert.

 

 

I'm not a defender of gooch's position at the head of this thread but if you are using the Psalms for prophecy you have a real reach to see them as prophetic. See my above posts if you want.

 

As I've said before, there is OT prophecies that Jesus and the church clearly draw from to reveal Jesus as the Christ. However, not everything in the OT is a direct line to Jesus even if we try to make it so. Many times the only way it can fit directly is to take it out of its context.

 

For example your Zechariah texts have a meaning to his day concerning the destruction of Jerusalem and the breaking of his covenant with the children of Israel.

 

It is centuries later that the church saw these words from Zechariah as just like what they saw experienced in Jesus. It was not for a messiah that Zechariah spoke but it was God's spirit that led later Christians to use those texts as revelatory for what they too experienced in Jesus.

 

That said, Isaiah 53 is very clear about God's willingness to sacrifice for His own and it becomes evident in Jesus later on. He becomes the embodiment of God's sacrificial love.

 

This has been a great discussion and I've loved hearing everyone's input on these texts. We will probably agree to disagree on some things but it has been a healthy discussion when we can speak of specifics.

One interesting quote from the original post is:

 

DESCENDENT OF DAVID

"The Messiah must be descended on his father's side from King David (see Genesis 49:10 and Isaiah 11:1). According to the Christian claim that Jesus was the product of a virgin birth, he had no father--and thus could not have possibly fulfilled the messianic requirement of being descended on his father's side from King David."

 

Does anyone have any comments on this quote? Are his points valid? or not?

 

Unless you consider God as "father/creator of all."

 

Hey, it's a good question to discuss. I've often wondered why Joseph has a geneology listed as well when he is not the real Dad of Jesus. We do forget sometimes the scandal of Jesus' birth to the rest of his community and world.

Matthew traces the family tree of Joseph, who was the legal father of Jesus. He also shows Joseph as a descendent of King David. And 14 generatons earlier Abraham...pretty good company. Joseph raised Jesus and this is why he is part of the Family tree of Jesus.

 

Luke goes all the way back to Adam.

Matthew traces the family tree of Joseph, who was the legal father of Jesus. He also shows Joseph as a descendent of King David. And 14 generatons earlier Abraham...pretty good company. Joseph raised Jesus and this is why he is part of the Family tree of Jesus.

 

Luke goes all the way back to Adam.

 

I think gooch's point was that Joseph may have been a legal father (adoptive if you will) he wasn't the real blood father. So why would Matthew spend all that time listing a family tree to someone who isn't really a relative.

 

Look I believe that Jesus was born of the virgin Mary as described but I can see where some people have issues that make them wonder. For me, that wonder and discussion does nothing to damage my faith or willingness to dialogue in the matter on either side of the conversation.

"Who isn't really a relative". I disagree with that quote my ole Buddy. I knew what he was getting to, but I believe Joesph had a very important role in Jesus' early life, and is very much a "relative". Don't forget your special someone today.