aa5874

Jesus, the so-called Christ, is properly identified as the offspring of a Ghost, as in gMatthew 1.18, "Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise: When Mary his mother was espoused to Joseph, before they came together, she was found with child of the Holy Ghost.

And gMatthew 1.20-21...."for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost. And she shall bring forth a son and thou shall call his name JESUS...."

In the NT, even Jesus, the son of the Ghost, claimed there would be many called 'Christ', so the word 'Christ' is not unique to this son of a spirit whatsoever.

Matthew 24.5, "For many shall come in my name, saying, I am Christ......

Matthew24.24, "For there shall shall arise false Christs...."

But there is a verse written by the author of gMark 13.21, which is of great concern , 'And if any man shall say to you Lo, here is Christ, or lo, He is there; believe him not.

Even to this day, many Jews follow this advice.

Clouseau

Yeeeees. Now dare we read it in an up-to-date version?????

Chris Weimer

Or, heaven forbid, the actual Greek?

Clouseau

Oh, sure.

Pneuma- a supernatural, non-material being - 'spirit'. Louw-Nida Lexicon

Now dare we read it in an up-to-date version?????

Clivedurdle

I must have missed a distinction between ghost and spirit...

Going back to the Hebrew Bible, there were disputes about priest kings - is Christ-Messiah a reasonable conjunction?

Was David of the house of Levi?

Melkizadek feels like he may be useful device to square this circle of priest kings, which makes me think is there a poitical and theological purpose behind these references to recognising Christs and kingly Christs.

Was there a propaganda job to be done to persuade Jews especially that Jesus is the Christ, to shoehorn in an idea and also rebuild the shoe (the definition of Christ) at the same time?

I would also bring in here as part of the argument about how definitions of Christ have morphed over time, leading to the question, was there an original real one?

A quick list - the fish Christ, Constantine's Emperor Christ, various nineteenth century behold I stand at the door and knock Christs, Dali's Superman Christ.

Clouseau

If it's all the same to you, then a modern version will be just as acceptable as the KJV.

Ok, double a? Or do you think that our too-sarcastic friend needs to consult a dictionary?

[Suggestive but incoherent garbage snipped.]

TedM

A little common sense:

1. The meaning of the word 800 years B.C. is not particularly relevant to this discussion

2. The gospels clearly present Jesus as the Messiah, so "Christ" in their contexts means "Messiah".

3. Paul references Jesus as fulfillment of the Messiac passages in a number of cases, so he too believed Jesus had been the Messiah. Christ, to him, meant Messiah.

Is there really any room for debate? If anyone is suggesting that "Christ" is simply another name for Jesus, they dont' have a leg to stand on from what I can determine.

ted

mountainman

The word Christ comes from the greek Χριστός (with an iota),
which means "anointed". However there is another word
χρηστός (with an eta) with a different root, having to do
with use or conduct: the word's meaning is something like
ethical, or decent, when it refers to people.

As far as I am aware these two words sound the same
in the original and in the contemporary Greek pronunication..

The references (in the Latin) to "Christos" and "Chrestos"
reflect these two different Greek roots.

In the old Greek tongue, the "Christian religion" was
entirely conflatable with the "Good religion".

Many inscriptions refer to χρησιανόν and not χρισιανόν,
nevertheless these have been erroneously presumed to
relate to "Christians". One example, which was on WIKI
was the reference to P.Oxy. 3035.

Does someone have an image of this P.Oxy.3035?
Does is show an iota or an eta?
(A few weeks back, WIKI showed the eta)



Pete Brown

spin

Where?

Qumran certainly is not from 800 BC.

Wrong. They don't "present him as the Messiah". They merely call him the christ (messiah).

Where does he present Jesus as the (Jewish) messiah?

None. Just look at one of the few attempts to qualify Jesus as messiah, the Davidic lineage: that descent is immediately denied. Jesus earthly kingship is denied. Where is the righteousness in the world that marks his days? Where are all the nations who are in fear of him?

The rabbi Akiba thought that Simon bar Kochba was the messiah. What characteristics did Jesus share with Simon??

The Jews laughed at the christians and their "messiah" because he umm, died, automatically excluding him from messiahship.

We have a different problem: christians waylaid the terminology and confused the Jewish term messiah with the pagan notion of savior.


spin

judge

Romans 9-15

I dont think it is that simple. You are looking at one jewish interpretation of what messiah might mean. However you (or your source) have no explanation for the verses contained in the chapters from Pauls letter to Rome linked to above.
IOW your sources look at some verses, emphasise some verses, and come up with one particular idea about what the messaih might be.
Can you explain why your sources are authoritative when they define the messiah?