The Jewish Concept of a Messiah

[SLD]

So the Christian idea of a messiah seems fundamentally at odds with the Jewish concept of a Messiah. It’s one of the things that first caused me to pause and realize that Christianity was bullshit. Hyamm Maccoby, a Jewish rabbinical scholar argued that the Jewish concept of a messiah is simply nothing but a restoration of the Davidian line of kings. No grand savior for all humanity who reconciles god and sinners. Simply a new Davidian king who is perfectly mortal. Not a god human hybrid.

Christians however cite to Isaiah chapter 53:




4Surely He has borne our griefs
And carried our sorrows;
Yet we esteemed Him stricken,
Smitten by God, and afflicted.
5But He was wounded for our transgressions,
He was bruised for our iniquities;
The chastisement for our peace was upon Him,
And by His stripes we are healed.
6All we like sheep have gone astray;
We have turned, every one, to his own way;
And the Lord has laid on Him the iniquity of us all.
7He was oppressed and He was afflicted,
Yet He opened not His mouth;
He was led as a lamb to the slaughter,
And as a sheep before its shearers is silent,
So He opened not His mouth.
8He was taken from prison and from judgment,
And who will declare His generation?
For He was cut off from the land of the living;
For the transgressions of My people He was stricken.
9And they made His grave with the wicked—
But with the rich at His death,
Because He had done no violence,
Nor was any deceit in His mouth.
10Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise Him;
He has put Him to grief.
When You make His soul an offering for sin,
He shall see His seed, He shall prolong His days,
And the pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in His hand.
11He shall see the labor of His soul, and be satisfied.
By His knowledge My righteous Servant shall justify many,
For He shall bear their iniquities.

Christians argue that this passage, really the whole chapter point to a global savior.

Of course it says nothing about a god man hybrid. It does talk about the savior as suffering, but not really as some sort of human sacrifice to god for all sins.

The expert thoughts on this?

 

[ideologyhunter]

Is the suffering servant in Isaiah a messianic prophecy in the first place? It seems to be a metaphor for Israel in Babylonian exile.

 

[Politesse]

Is the suffering servant in Isaiah a messianic prophecy in the first place?

That depends a lot on what you mean by "in the first place". If you're asking whether Isaiah the prophet thought he was predicting something like the Biblical Jesus, then almost certainly not, and you're correct to be thinking about Isaiah's immediate political context for a more meaningful contemporary explanation for that document.

On the other hand, we know from many other documents that by Jesus' time, more than five hundred years later, many new and different narratives had sprung up around the Jewish Messiah, as befits different times. A people under centuries of oppression by hostile foreign powers have a lot more interest in apocalyptic narratives (and rebelliously Persian/Magi looking ones at that). Isaiah, Malachi, and Daniel, with their vague and bombastic language, had left many doors open for reinterpretation by later generations, and the Christian sect was not the first to walk through those doors. This was Jesus' Palestine, which had been looking for a more spiritual (and militaristic) Messiah for centuries before his birth. Assuming, of course, that he had a birth and wasn't himself a fictive or euhemerized outgrowth of that very strain of increasingly gnostic and apocalyptic literature.

 

[Elixir]

"euhemerized"?

Thanks! Completely unfamiliar with that word, and looking it up, it's a beaut!
Can't wait to wrongly use it!

(thinking about accusing the next JW's who come visit: "Hie thee hence thou euhemerizing varlet!")

 

[Politesse]

"euhemerized"?

Thanks! Completely unfamiliar with that word, and looking it up, it's a beaut!
Can't wait to wrongly use it!

(thinking about accusing the next JW's who come visit: "Hie thee hence thou euhemerizing varlet!")

The funny thing about Euhemer in this context is that the only reason we still know his name is because of his popularity with the early Christians, who glibly used his theories to explain away the Greek demigods, without ever supposing their own religous leader would one day come under similar suspicion. To them Hercules happened in "mythic times" whereas Jesus was recent memory, so why would the work of a mythologist apply to him? The idea that Euhemerization might be a rapid process had not occurred to anyone.

 

[steve_bank]

From reporting there are Israelis and Palestinians trying to bridge the gap, but they are a small minority on both sides.

Israelis today as Jews in the time of Christ would have no use with a Jewish prophet preaching universal love and salvation for all not just Jews.

The Jews circa JC were facing an existential military threat from Rome. Israel today is facing an existential threat.

I listened to an NPR show on the hustler of Thanksgiving myth I grew up with. The mythical narrative of Thanksgi9vng I grew up with is traceable to an individual. A narrator on the show painted it as a white wash of oppressive treatment of the native populations gong back to the first colonists. Natives and colonials are brothers.

The story became popularized in 19th century magazines and newspapers. Lincoln made it a national holiday to be celebrated by all Americans on the same day. A story of unity.

Politics has made use of mythology back to the beginning of civilizations.

The question is what were the interests served by the gospel Jesus narrative.

From a history of Islam I read the practice of a leader sending agents to start a prophesy and then showing up to fulfill the prophesy was not unheard of.

 

[No Robots]

Jesus’s thinking was far beyond his fellow Jews. He had no problem with their views on the Messiah, and indeed had no problem in principle with armed revolt. But he was far shrewder than the rebels. He knew the war of spirit and intellect against empire would take place over many years and would involve the whole of humanity. He knew that eventually empire would fall, and all humanity would unite under the rule of Jehovah. He knew that he and Jehovah were one, and that all mankind would become one with Jehovah.

 

[bilby]

Jesus’s thinking was far beyond his fellow Jews. He had no problem with their views on the Messiah, and indeed had no problem in principle with armed revolt. But he was far shrewder than the rebels. He knew the war of spirit and intellect against empire would take place over many years and would involve the whole of humanity. He knew that eventually empire would fall, and all humanity would unite under the rule of Jehovah. He knew that he and Jehovah were one, and that all mankind would become one with Jehovah.

So he was a certifiable nutcase?

 

[No Robots]

Jesus’s thinking was far beyond his fellow Jews. He had no problem with their views on the Messiah, and indeed had no problem in principle with armed revolt. But he was far shrewder than the rebels. He knew the war of spirit and intellect against empire would take place over many years and would involve the whole of humanity. He knew that eventually empire would fall, and all humanity would unite under the rule of Jehovah. He knew that he and Jehovah were one, and that all mankind would become one with Jehovah.

So he was a certifiable nutcase?

It's basically the same position as Marx....

 

[steve_bank]

Jesus’s thinking was far beyond his fellow Jews. He had no problem with their views on the Messiah, and indeed had no problem in principle with armed revolt. But he was far shrewder than the rebels. He knew the war of spirit and intellect against empire would take place over many years and would involve the whole of humanity. He knew that eventually empire would fall, and all humanity would unite under the rule of Jehovah. He knew that he and Jehovah were one, and that all mankind would become one with Jehovah.

Is that from your dead guru? There is none of that in the gospels. Like all Christians wild ass interpretation and speculation.

The gospel Jesus was apocalyptic, in my opinion he would be talking about the obvious looming destruction of Israel by Rome. Not the entire world. The apostles thought the end was near.

The primary message of the gospel Jesus was bare your burdens, believe in me, and you will live in an eternal glory, the catch being after you die.


Marx was against the religion of his day. It was a tool of government control. It is no mystery why the Russian communists got rid of and suppressed religion.

What did the gospel Jesus do?

Magically fed a crowd from one basket. Watch me as I pull a fish out of my hat.

Maniacally turned water to wine, he was on the social A list for sure.

Magically raised someone from the dead.

Walked around calling everybody hypocrites.

Went around saying catch phrases. If somebody hits you turn the other cheek, somebody wants your shirt give him your coat too, .

No divorce and fornication.

One finds unity in knowing you are part of human com minty. No god or Jesus required.

NR, when you are outside do you feel any connection to people around you? Or is everybody yuiu see all wrong needing you to save them? Are you above those who do not see it as you do?

Love your neighbor as yourself, right?

 

[No Robots]

NR, when you are outside do you feel any connection to people around you? Or is everybody yuiu see all wrong needing you to save them? Are you above those who do not see it as you do?

Love your neighbor as yourself, right?

I firmly adhere to the principle of dialectic, meaning that I seek out those who disagree with me. This serves my cause in a variety of ways. First, I get to present my case. Second, counter-arguments force me to sharpen my own position. Third, neutral parties can observe the debate and make up there own minds. Fourth, I may actually win over some staunch adversaries.

 

[steve_bank]

Nice non response. So you know how to use the word dialectic, I am am underwhelmed.

Marx was a Jew true enough, but it is like saying somebody is Irish or Italian. It says noting about belief From the net, Mark;s father converted his kids to Chrtianity.

People of Jewish decent are as varied as any others. Some are secular or non Jewish religious. Judaism like Christianity runs from liberal to moderate to extreme conservative.

Yvor premise that Marx repremnts a turn towards global Judaism is not supported. It is laughable

Marxism rejected religion because it was a tool used by those in power to control the lower classes. Fear.

The question to you is how based on what you believe how you relate to people around you.

That stuff you posted that I responded to, please connect it to the gospel Jesus. I doubt you can.

 

[No Robots]

Nice non response. So you know how to use the word dialectic, I am am underwhelmed.

Marx was a Jew true enough, but it is like saying somebody is Irish or Italian. It says noting about belief From the net, Mark;s father converted his kids to Chrtianity.

People of Jewish decent are as varied as any others. Some are secular or non Jewish religious. Judaism like Christianity runs from liberal to moderate to extreme conservative.

Yvor premise that Marx repremnts a turn towards global Judaism is not supported. It is laughable

Marxism rejected religion because it was a tool used by those in power to control the lower classes. Fear.

The question to you is how based on what you believe how you relate to people around you.

That stuff you posted that I responded to, please connect it to the gospel Jesus. I doubt you can.

I'll spell it out for you.

You have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor, and hate thy enemy.
But I say to you, Love your enemies: do good to them that hate you: and pray for them that persecute and calumniate you:
That you may be the children of your Father who is in heaven, who maketh his sun to rise upon the good, and bad, and raineth upon the just and the unjust.
For if you love them that love you, what reward shall you have? do not even the publicans this?
And if you salute your brethren only, what do you more? do not also the heathens this?
Be you therefore perfect, as also your heavenly Father is perfect.

This is rational dialectic.

 

[No Robots]

Marx states in economic/scientific terms what Jesus states in religious/metaphysical terms.

 

[steve_bank]

Resorting to jargon is a tried and true method to deflect questions.

Your claim is the world is becoming Jewish. What is your explicit evidence?

You are arguing a conclusion of your dead author without being able to support the concussion with evidence.

Quoting the Holy Babel in an Old English translation gets you nowhere. Christians get off on speaking it.

You claim JC was ahead of his time. Hardly. Buddhist morality and ethics precedes JC by about 300 years. Hindus older than that. Confucianism.

The basic moral and ethical principles are common in all cinctures, in different forms and expressions.

JC's sound bites are extraordinary only if you are ignorant of other traditions.


Yo0ur claim of what JC thought of militant Jews has no foundation in the gospels.


I am coining a new term, Dialectic Immaterialism. Dialogue over imaginary realities.

 

[No Robots]

Resorting to jargon is a tried and true method to deflect questions.

Your claim is the world is becoming Jewish. What is your explicit evidence?

You are arguing a conclusion of your dead author without being able to support the concussion with evidence.

Quoting the Holy Babel in an Old English translation gets you nowhere. Christians get off on speaking it.

You claim JC was ahead of his time. Hardly. Buddhist morality and ethics precedes JC by about 300 years. Hindus older than that. Confucianism.

The basic moral and ethical principles are common in all cinctures, in different forms and expressions.

JC's sound bites are extraordinary only if you are ignorant of other traditions.


Yo0ur claim of what JC thought of militant Jews has no foundation in the gospels.


I am coining a new term, Dialectic Immaterialism. Dialogue over imaginary realities.

There is the empirical evidence. Billions of people devote their lives to Jewish literature and thought. Christians, Muslims and Marxists are all essentially Jews, whether they know it or not. Science leads inevitably to monism, and the clearest possible expression of monism is found in the Bible. Hear, Israel! Being is your god. Being is One.

 

[DBT]

How does science inevitably lead to monism?

 

[No Robots]

How does science inevitably lead to monism?

Observation leads to the conclusion that all phenomena are united in a continuum that encompasses the whole of reality, including thought.

 

[steve_bank]

Monism, there you go again substituting jargon for substance.

Your argument that because people read the bible they are all Jews is non sequitur, concision does not follow from premise. No connection.

A lot of people like Chinese food, therefore they are all Chinese.

Being Jewish is a culture, race, and religion.

1. Do you keep kosher?
2. Are you circumcised if you are male?
3. Do you go to temple?
4. Do you follow Jewish moral laws and customs?

About 10 years ago I knew a 20 something Jewish guy who decided to emigrate to Israel to join the Israeli militray. He described what he had to go through.

He had to prove he was Jewish. He had to show he was living a Jewish life. His parentage and church affiliation were investigated.

Were you born and raised Jewish NR? Or are you a self proclaimed Jew? I have known a few.

Western civilization and thought traces back to ancient Greece. We are strongly influenced by Romans.

Philosophically and politically we are not Jewish. Christianity as was passed down was a bastardization of various non Jewish influences. Syncretic

Asia has a different historical and cultural path. Confucianism is a major influence.

 

[DBT]

How does science inevitably lead to monism?

Observation leads to the conclusion that all phenomena are united in a continuum that encompasses the whole of reality, including thought.

It also relates to the idea of God, and that was the point of my question.