A question about Jesus

[Potholer]

A while ago I was talking to a Christian, a Jew and an atheist in the UM chatroom.

I'm not sure how but we started talking about Jesus and I asked them both why, according to their religion, Jesus could or couldn't have been the messiah.

This is how I understood things, correct me it I've got something wrong but -

The Jew said that, according to them, Jesus could not have been the messiah because the messiah has to be of the line of David. The line of David must be passed through the male but if Jesus is the son of God, he obviously isn't a descendent.

I can't remember what the Christian said but I do recall he insisted Jesus was the Messiah.

I found this really interesting (the two opinions, I always make sure I hear both sides of a story before I make a conclusion).

So, I told my real life Christian friends about it to see what they thought and to see if I'd misunderstood anything. They thought that the Jew had brought up a very good point and one of them asked their pastor about it. He said that the line of David can be passed through the female and therefore Jesus is legit.

I've been wanting to get more information. I want everyone to understand that, in my view, these are all opinions. When it comes to religion no-one is really right because how can someone have the wrong opinion? But I want to know what others say about it. There is a big misundertanding here. The Christian said the line can be passed through the female but the Jew said it can't.

Who agrees with what? (notice I'm not saying, "Who is right?", just what others believe is right)

Thanks alot, really.

Potholer

[beowulf]

The Christian said the line can be passed through the female but the Jew said it can't.

Now answer this question, You have (I’m sure) heard of the “House of David”, but have you ever heard of the “House of Mary” or the “House of Rachel”? You haven’t have you? Seems that the Jew must know more about his own people (and the people of Jesus, who was a Jew) than a Xian who only parrots what he was told in his local church. The line of descent among the Jews, past and present, was/is thru the male lineage. Before some xian tries to muddy the water with the claim that Mary’s father adopted Joseph, it was not common practice for a man to adopt an older man (by custom Jewish husbands were 15 to 20 years, or more, older than their wives) and would not have changed Joseph’s actual lineage.

[Starlight Rose]

The Christian said the line can be passed through the female but the Jew said it can't.

Now answer this question, You have (I’m sure) heard of the “House of David”, but have you ever heard of the “House of Mary” or the “House of Rachel”? You haven’t have you? Seems that the Jew must know more about his own people (and the people of Jesus, who was a Jew) than a Xian who only parrots what he was told in his local church. The line of descent among the Jews, past and present, was/is thru the male lineage. Before some xian tries to muddy the water with the claim that Mary’s father adopted Joseph, it was not common practice for a man to adopt an older man (by custom Jewish husbands were 15 to 20 years, or more, older than their wives) and would not have changed Joseph’s actual lineage.

354002[/snapback]

Thankyou beo, that was absolutely facinating, I had no idea about he lineage of jewish familys, I was under the impression that the blood line was passed down from mother to child, If your mother was a jew, then you were, but if your father was and your mother wasnt, then you were the religion of your father.

You have opened my eyes..

Btw, I found Jesus myself.... HE was behind my couch all the time..lol.

[Grandpa Greenman]

Btw, I found Jesus myself.... HE was behind my couch all the time..lol.

I have to remember that the next time someone asks me if I have found Jesus. " No, but did you look behind the couch?"

That is better than, " No, don't tell me you have lost him again. You should really keep better track of your Gods"

I know, I know, bad Pagan keep out of the Jesus threads. I have a cold and codene is good stuff.

[Starlight Rose]

Btw, I found Jesus myself.... HE was behind my couch all the time..lol.

I have to remember that the next time someone asks me if I have found Jesus. " No, but did you look behind the couch?"

That is better than, " No, don't tell me you have lost him again. You should really keep better track of your Gods"

I know, I know, bad Pagan keep out of the Jesus threads. I have a cold and codene is good stuff.

354313[/snapback]

lol it works darkwind, ive actually said it to door knockers before. They dont know quite how to take it, but its such a giggle to see the look on their faces.

Codeine is a wonderful thing.. *sighs*.

[Potholer]

I was under the impression that the blood line was passed down from mother to child, If your mother was a jew, then you were, but if your father was and your mother wasnt, then you were the religion of your father.

354161[/snapback]

Ok, so does that work for the line of David as well? It can be passed through the mother or father, whichever is of that blood?

My question wasn't what parent can Judaism be passed through, but which parent can the line of David be passed through.

The line of descent among the Jews, past and present, was/is thru the male lineage.

Oh, so it is through the male?

Seems that the Jew must know more about his own people (and the people of Jesus, who was a Jew) than a Xian who only parrots what he was told in his local church.

How else is the person meant to learn about his religion unless someone (eg his church) tells him?

Or is the knowledge of God innate? But wait, that would be material for a different thread, so lets not go off topic.

So, still, the Christian say it can be passed through either, the Jew says it's just the male.

[Zaus]

Jesus never said he was the messiah, neither did he say he was the son of God. All he said was(understatement).

"I am the way, the truth, and the light."

-John 14:6

[Unorthodox Thesis]

My atheist friend has a HALO2 profile named "Jesus".

Edited November 13, 2004 by Norman

[Potholer]

Jesus never said he was the messiah, neither did he say he was the son of God. All he said was(understatement).

"I am the way, the truth, and the light."

-John 14:6

354686[/snapback]

Maybe Jesus didn't but all his followers did/do. Or have I got some serious wires crossed here?

EDIT: spelling

Edited November 15, 2004 by Potholer

[tam]

Check out this site good folks

http:idastone.org/cr/files/mithraschristianity.htmlDo you know of Mithra ?

Does his story sound abit familiar?

[saucy]

Jesus was the messiah any way you look at it. Jewish people didn't look at women to pass the line? That's wrong. Matthew's geneology alone contains four women! Both Joseph and Mary came from the line of David so either way, the line came from the mother or Jesus was the adopted son of Joseph, he came through the same line prophesied. A typical jew or atheist would argue he didn't just to prove the prophecies wrong, but I challenge the Jews to look in their bibles at the things the Messiah is supposed to fulfill. What was the messiah supposed to do in his ministry? He did every one of them. People say he did things to fulfill those prophecies, but he fulfilled all the ones he couldn't control. There should be no doubt that Jesus is the messiah.

[Potholer]

Saucy -

That's the thing. According to the Jew -

1. To be the messiah Jesus has to be of the line of David.

2. The line cannot be passed through the female.

3. Joseph adopted Jesus. He wasn't a blood relation therefore it doesn't count.

It doesn't matter how many of the criteria he filled, he wasn't of the line and therefore he can't be the messiah.

I'm not saying this is fact. I am merely stating what it is like from the Jewish point of view.

So, according to the Christian then -

1. Jesus filled many of the prophecies.

2. He was adopted and Mary was of the line therefore, either way, he is of the line of David

Both groups have their own point of view and neither will give nor acknowledge the other.

Is it possible for both sides to be solid in their own belief without putting down the other? (I'm serious, is it possible for that to happen?)

[scipherel]

and i'm pretty sure that someone's gonna come here and will say Jesus is not the messiah. He is the UFO.

[Consummate Deist]

First, before you argue whether Jesus was the Messiah or not, you have to prove that Jesus ever existed, without using the scriptures, Saucy, you can't use the bible to prove the bible.....The proof has to be contemporary (nothing 1 to 3 generations later) and totally secular....I await you proof, because without it the whole discussion is moot!

[Potholer]

Ok, apparently I'm not making myself clear.

The point of this thread is not to ask for facts. In my opinion, it is pointless to ask for facts about religion. It's about belief and if it makes you feel better about your life, that's great! Not to mention that I don't want this turning into a Christian bashing thread. I have the utmost respect for religious people as long as they don't push their beliefs on me.

So, what I'm asking is -

Do you believe (<---forgive me for that thistle, it seems I need to highlight that word heavily) that Jesus (whether he be fact or fiction is irrelevant) was the Messiah and why? What is your reasoning behind it?

Thank you

Potholer

[Consummate Deist]

Do you believe (<---forgive me for that thistle, it seems I need to highlight that word heavily) that Jesus (whether he be fact or fiction is irrelevant) was the Messiah and why? What is your reasoning behind it?

Put that way, my answer is a hearty "No Way", I don't even believe that the Jesus of the bible existed. I do believe that he was based on the Essene "Great Teacher" who was crucified in the 1st Century BCE and several other teachers and Rabbis of that period prior to the establishment of the Christ Cult in late 1st Century CE. I agree with the Jews, the Messiah (which only means anointed) has yet to come and when he does, he will be a military king to establish God's kingdom on earth. But even then, I kinda doubt the Jewish version too......

[Unorthodox Thesis]

If Jesus ever existed, he was probably the messiah

due to the reason of His death. His death was a sacrifice;

thats what we christains believe. So, since He considered

His death to be a sacrifice, I believe He was the messiah.

[Consummate Deist]

Well goody, I am glad you do. I won’t try to convince you otherwise, even if the key term was “IF”. See, there is no evidence or proof that he ever existed (other than the NT which can’t be used to prove itself). Even then, he was 1500 years later than Osiris in being a sacrifice and 600 years later than Mithra, 500 years later than Krishna, and around 1600 years later than San Yu. All those saviors take precedence in their sacrifices, so sacrifices must not have much meaning. The next question is why, Neither the OT or Jesus himself gave a reason for such a sacrifice. Only after Paul and later St. Augustine invented the original sin was there a reason for a sacrifice!

[Unorthodox Thesis]

Whatever makes you feel good after you sin.

Edited November 16, 2004 by Norman

[Penelope_the_Penguin]

Consummate Deist, I'm not a religious person, my family is not religious. However, there is actually proof that Jesus the person existed through ancient writings such as the Dead Sea Scrolls. I don't believe necessarily that he was the Messiah, healed people or anything, but there is strong historical evidence that someone called Jesus did exist. And that this person called Jesus was some sort of prophet. Whether he was the Messiah is the question we have to ask ourselves.

Penny

[saucy]

Yeah, there is proof outside the bible that Jesus really existed. Read the book "Case for Christ" by Lee Strobel. It will answer every single question about his blood line better than I can, is there proof outside the bible of his existance, could he of survived the brutal punishments and he talks to doctors, theologians, historians and even athiests.

Do I believe that Jesus was the Messiah? Yes I do. He fit the profile 100%. Without a doubt in my mind.

[Potholer]

I posted the link to this thread on my blog and one one of my Christian friends answered. I thought I'd share and she wouldn't mind hearing what others think -

I just read that thread and thought it was very interesting. Couldn't work out how to reply without joining the community so I figured I would leave a message here.

I found it very interesting what saucy wrote on the thread yet you seemed to ignore it here is the bit I am referring to

"Jewish people didn't look at women to pass the line? That's wrong. Matthew's geneaology alone contains four women! Both Joseph and Mary came from the line of David so either way, the line came from the mother or Jesus was the adopted son of Joseph, he came through the same line prophesied."

I don't know about the whole Jesus being adopted thing and I agree that that doesn't explain it sufficiently but I thought the comment about the geneaologies is very good. Granted Matthew is in the New Testament therefore the Jews may have issues with using him as an example but It made me remember that there are special cases even in the Old Testament where women are included in a geneaology. This may not have been the normal practice but it did happen.

Don't know if that helps at all. Sorry is is so long but let me know what you think

I asked "Ok, when it says women were in the geneaology, does that mean they passed the line on? As in, she marries a non-David man and the children are considered to be of the line. Have I got that?"

To which she answered she'd try find out more.

I am now totally confused. Why is it that Jesus can't be the messiah again?

Thanks everyone for your opinions

Potholer

[Zaus]

Consummate Deist Posted Yesterday, 05:03 AM

First, before you argue whether Jesus was the Messiah or not, you have to prove that Jesus ever existed, without using the scriptures... you can't use the bible to prove the bible.....The proof has to be contemporary (nothing 1 to 3 generations later) and totally secular....I await you proof, because without it the whole discussion is moot!

This thread isnt about whether Jesus was a real person or not, Its about whether(according to the scriptures) He was the Messiah. Now that you know this you should realize your post is moot.

[Consummate Deist]

Consummate Deist, I'm not a religious person, my family is not religious. However, there is actually proof that Jesus the person existed through ancient writings such as the Dead Sea Scrolls. I don't believe necessarily that he was the Messiah, healed people or anything, but there is strong historical evidence that someone called Jesus did exist. And that this person called Jesus was some sort of prophet. Whether he was the Messiah is the question we have to ask ourselves

The Dead Sea scrolls are the Essene communities copies of the OT, they predate Jesus and do not address him in any manner. Although they have not yet been completely translated, they have shown that the OT is not exactly the same now as it was then. There is no contemporary secular mention of a Jesus of Nazareth or of fantastic miracles that would have had the Emperor of Rome sending delegates to investigate. There is only a set of gospels written generations after the fact, the letters from Paul that disclose a Jesus very unlike the one of the gospels, and the mentions in Roman and Jewish documents and histories written 3-4 generations later than the occurrances with no corroborating witnesses. Since Jesus had to be of the house of David and linage passed through the male line, Jesus could not be the messiah.

Yeah, there is proof outside the bible that Jesus really existed. Read the book "Case for Christ" by Lee Strobel. It will answer every single question about his blood line better than I can, is there proof outside the bible of his existance, could he of survived the brutal punishments and he talks to doctors, theologians, historians and even athiests.

Been there, done that. Stobel did not interview any critics of Christian apologetics, even though he attacks such individuals in his book. His claims on eye witness, documentary or corroborating evidence do not hold water even with Christian scholars. Stobel attempted to enlist Archaeology in his case to prove Jesus and failed miserably. The archaeologist interviewed (Dr.John McRay of Wheaton College) openly admitted that archaeology can not prove Jesus. Overall, I found “The Case” to be one-sided and for anyone with any sort of historical background, totally unconvincing.

This thread isnt about whether Jesus was a real person or not, Its about whether(according to the scriptures) He was the Messiah. Now that you know this you should realize your post is moot.

Just to see if I misunderstood, I went back to the original posting (the one that I have been addressing) and found no mention of the scriptures, therefore my post is very moot. Yours on the other hand is an attempt to shut someone up that must be rocking your beliefs!

Now I know why Beowulf asked that question in the "Biggest Question" thread!

[Zaus]

Consummate Deist Posted Today, 06:10 AM

Just to see if I misunderstood, I went back to the original posting (the one that I have been addressing) and found no mention of the scriptures, therefore my post is very moot. Yours on the other hand is an attempt to shut someone up that must be rocking your beliefs!

The original post is a question about whether Jesus is the Messiah or not, It has nothing to do with whether Jesus is a real person or not. Besides people talk about things that have nothing to do with reality anyway. By the way I am not a believer and I was trying to shut you up because you are bringing nothing to this thread besides wasted posts. And as for proof that Jesus existed or not, people have been debating that for thousands of years and there is no conclusion. Did you think someone would photocopy an ancient scroll and post it as proof? Ofcourse not! This will be my last post on this subject.