ph2ter

But I don't think that Christians were so wrong with their reading of the OT. They extracted from it the real essence which was hidden there. What I mean is that that Christians unconsciously recognized the deeper mythological schema which pervades the OT despite the monotheistic reform and cult reform made close to the time of the Babylonian exile. I recognize the sacrifice of the firstborns as a central motive of the first two books of the Hebrew Bible. In the myth, the sacrifice of the firstborn is applied to no one other than to the god's son himself. In the Phoenician myth on the occurrence of a pestilence and mortality god El sacrifices his firstborn son Iedoud to his father. Jesus is sacrificed firstborn son of Jhwh or even El. Christians arrived at that reading the Hebrew Bible and they were no wrong. Differently put, the Hebrew Bible was going astray through time, but despite that Christians recognized the original myth.

Joan of Bark

If Jesus was born of a virgin, how could He be a descendant of any line, since the Jews at that time tracked lineage through the men?

aa5874

FYI, the Messiah Simon was not executed for blasphemy. The Jews with Simon the Messiah fought and killed the Romans together. Isaiah 53 had nothing to do with the Messiah called Simon.. It is the book called Daniel that refers to a Messiah by name, no other book in the Bible, KJV Old Testamant, use the name Messiah.

Isaiah 53 is completely ambiguous. The use of the word "HE" in the chapter cannot be defined or explained except by guesswork. The author of Isaiah did not ever use the word Jesus or Messiah.

It would appear that the Jews expected the Messiah to be a ruler not a blasphemer.

Simon Bar Cocheba was a ruler on earth, JESUS ruled after resurrection. Please show me the prophecy for the resurrection on the third day for Simon the Messiah.

arnoldo

Correct.
Correct.

arnoldo

IIRC, the jews didn't fully recognize Joseph the first time they saw him either.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_(Hebrew_Bible)

show_no_mercy

As a matter of fact, Jesus is the anti-Christ of these messainich predictions.

A. Jesus' arrival heralded the destruction of the Temple.

B. Jesus' arrival heralded the scattering of the Jews from their promised land, and it being renamed as "Palestine"

C. Jesus' arrival heralded over 1,800 years of persecution of Jews. Intimidation, murders, evictions, pogroms, holocausts in Protestant Germany, inquisitions, etc. all on account of their supposed "deicide".

D. Jesus' arrival heralded the worldwide worship of himself as god and not YHWH.

badger3k

Basically, what you seem to be saying, and correct me if I am wrong, is that they reinterpreted the texts to basically fit what they wanted. Such themes may (and I think do) exist - the sacrificial lamb concept, for example. But what gave the early Christians the right to rip the texts from their creators and remake the texts to fit their own theology (or to develop their theology from their interpretations)? It seems a clear case of copyright infringement.

I can't see how the people for whom the text had been written, who interpreted it for themselves, could get it "wrong" - that implies that there is a "right" - which I think you seem to think is the Christian interpretation. What are the standards you use to determine this? Where is the evidence? How should we outsiders look at all this messing around and distortion of others work, and where is the evidence that says that the Christians are more correct in their reading than the Jews? It's like someone (as happened, IIRC) telling JK Rowling what her work was wrong (I think it referred to Dumbledore) - although for this to be closer, JKR would have to be dead for a while and unable to answer, although her estate can substitute for the Rabbis.

Why should we not just go to the original Canaanite myths and skip the later additions? :constern01:

badger3k

But, if Jesus was the Christ and the Anti-Christ, shouldn't the resulting explosion have destroyed the...Temple...Jerusalem...it all makes sense...:wave:

Sheshbazzar

There is the originally Jewish theme of the coming of The Jewish Messiah, the plagiarised and substituted Gentile "Christ" theme is the functioning anti-thesis,
and The anti-MESSIAH, fashioned out of lies by liars, a Gentile fabricated idolatrous abomination set against and opposing the Jewish religion and its Messiah.

'Christ' IS NOT the equivalent or equal of 'Messiah', the terms and themes ARE NOT interchangeable, Being from their roots distinct and separate personages and personalities.
'Christ' is NOT, never has been, and never will be THE (Jewish) Messiah, nor vice versa.

Sheshbazzar

'Yeshua' _יהושוע _ IS NOT_ 'Jesus' _הסוס.

As time will tell;
שקר הסוס לתשועה וברב חילו לא ימלט׃
Psalm 33:17