FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 01-14-2005, 04:16 PM   #1
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: The deformation age
Posts: 1,809
Default Nazerite?

One of the arguments I hear against Jesus being the Messiah {primarily from Orthodox Jews} is that the Messiah is supposed to be a Nazerite, and Jesus was not.

Can anybody provide more information on this? It seems to be a pretty fascinating subject. Why wouldn't Luke recognize this? Was he simply unfamilliar with a Nazerite, and chose to place Jesus' birth in Nazareth {a purely fictional town}?
Crucifiction is offline  
Old 01-14-2005, 04:21 PM   #2
Contributor
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Los Angeles area
Posts: 40,549
Default

Could you show where the Messiah was supposed to be a Nazerite?
Toto is offline  
Old 01-14-2005, 04:25 PM   #3
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: The deformation age
Posts: 1,809
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toto
Could you show where the Messiah was supposed to be a Nazerite?
Unfortunatly, no.

All I know about the matter is that I read an essay on the Internet a few years ago writen by a Rabbi which said that Jesus couldn't possibly be the Messiah, because he was supposed to be a Nazerite; the same Jewish sect as Samson.

I was just wondering if anybody else had heard of this argument against the divinity of Christ, and if it was factually relevant.
Crucifiction is offline  
Old 01-14-2005, 07:56 PM   #4
Talk Freethought Staff
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Heart of the Bible Belt
Posts: 5,807
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crucifiction
Unfortunatly, no.

All I know about the matter is that I read an essay on the Internet a few years ago writen by a Rabbi which said that Jesus couldn't possibly be the Messiah, because he was supposed to be a Nazerite; the same Jewish sect as Samson.

I was just wondering if anybody else had heard of this argument against the divinity of Christ, and if it was factually relevant.
I don't believe that there is any prophecy in the Old Testament canon commonly accepted today that says anything about the messiah being a Nazerite. You may be confusing the odd reference made by whoever wrote the book of "Matthew" (Matt 2:23) where it says "that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a Nazarene".

There was a difference between taking a Nazerite vow and simply being from the city of Nazereth.

HTH

-Atheos
Atheos is offline  
Old 01-14-2005, 08:57 PM   #5
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: The deformation age
Posts: 1,809
Default

Well, I did confuse Nazareth; it's real, Bethlehem wasn't.

And I'm thinking this is more like an extra-Biblical Judaistic tradition; anybody have an idea?
Crucifiction is offline  
Old 01-15-2005, 02:34 AM   #6
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: ""
Posts: 3,863
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crucifiction
One of the arguments I hear against Jesus being the Messiah {primarily from Orthodox Jews} is that the Messiah is supposed to be a Nazerite, and Jesus was not.

Can anybody provide more information on this? It seems to be a pretty fascinating subject. Why wouldn't Luke recognize this? Was he simply unfamilliar with a Nazerite, and chose to place Jesus' birth in Nazareth {a purely fictional town}?
"Epiphanius, an early Christian cataloguer of 'heresies' mentions a pre-Christian sect called 'the Nazoreans' their name meaning the Keepers of the Torah, or possibly, the secrets (see Mark 4:11, 'To you has been given the kingdom of God but to those outside all is by way of parable'). These Nazoreans were the heirs, supposedly of the neoprimitivist sect of the Rechabites descending from the times of Jeremiah (Jer. 35:1-10). They were like Gypsies, itinerant carpenters. 'Nazorean' occurs once unambiguously in the New Testament itself as a designation in Acts 24:5: 'a ring leader of the sect of the Nazoreans'. Robert Eisler (The Messiah Jesus and John the Baptist), Hugh J. Schonfield (North Palestinian Sectarians and Christian Origins), have plausibly suggested that Jesus (an early Christians generally) were members of this Jewish pious sect"

Robert Price, Incredible Shrinking Son of Man, p.53

Jdges 13:5 says "He will be a Nazirite". Matthew appears to have got Nazwraois (in the Alex Text) from that. This was later redacted to Nazarene.

I know, I have delayed in finalizing my Nazareth paper.
Ted Hoffman is offline  
Old 01-15-2005, 10:09 AM   #7
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Rachacha NY
Posts: 4,219
Default

I was under the impression that Nazareth didn't exist at the time of Jesus, as the Romans had no record of the place. And they wrote down everything; so I can't see them missing a whole city.

I am of the opinion (like many others) that he was a Nazarene, a member of the cult that supposedly camped out in the wilderness and were in charge of maintaining the secrets hidden under the Temple.

Ty
TySixtus is offline  
Old 01-16-2005, 05:24 AM   #8
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Birmingham UK
Posts: 4,876
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crucifiction
One of the arguments I hear against Jesus being the Messiah {primarily from Orthodox Jews} is that the Messiah is supposed to be a Nazerite, and Jesus was not.

Can anybody provide more information on this?
I'm not aware of such a view.

Is it possible that the actual argument went something like this ?

Christians believe according to Matthew 2:23 that the scriptural
prophecies require the Messiah to be a Nazerite.

Jesus however was clearly not a Nazerite (he drank wine etc)

Hence by Christians own arguments Jesus is not the Messiah.


I don't myself find it a very solid argument but there are several Jewish websites putting forward this sort of argument ie one based not upon Jewish Messianic beliefs but upon alleged contradictions and inconsistencies within Christian beliefs about the Messianic status of Jesus.

Andrew Criddle
andrewcriddle is offline  
Old 01-16-2005, 05:28 AM   #9
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: The deformation age
Posts: 1,809
Default

Hmm... that could be it; in fact, I think it is.

By the by, why do you not find it solid?
Crucifiction is offline  
Old 01-16-2005, 06:49 AM   #10
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Birmingham UK
Posts: 4,876
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Crucifiction
Hmm... that could be it; in fact, I think it is.

By the by, why do you not find it solid?
Matthew 2:23 is a puzzling verse but I doubt if Matthew meant to claim that scripture says that the Messiah will be a Nazerite in the sense of Samson or Samuel. Particularly since I can't see where in the Hebrew Bible Matthew would have got that idea.

Andrew Criddle
andrewcriddle is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:46 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.