|
As the word "messiah" just means the" anointed
one", (just as " christ" does) the question is also
: was Jesus ever anointed? To be king or priest or Messiah he had
to have been. All we have recorded is a spiritual event with the
Holy Spirit appearing as a dove.
On these web pages we have shown in other articles that the usual
chapters and verses used such as Isaiah 9, 11, and 49, and 53,
Job 19, and Daniel 9, Micah 2 v5 etc do not stand up to scrutiny
with an open mind and some knowledge of Hebrew.
There are others in Zechariah, for instance, such as in ch .11
about the 30 pieces of silver, which if read in context, will be
seen to be the price of the hire of the prophet which he returns
to God's treasury at the temple. It is in the context, also, of
the breaking of the covenant by God with the people because of
their sin in worshipping another god. God states that He will no
longer be their Shepherd. How can this understanding be applied
to the betrayal of Jesus by Judas? This makes Judas a prophet and
servant of God. Worshipping another god is what Christianity is
about and if the Jews had not killed Jesus how would the Christians
have had their substitute sacrifice? In that respect Judas was
doing God's work, but if this standard pay for such work from temple
officials where is the significance in the prophecy?
A much more important verse is ch.12 v10. Here we have in our
Bibles "They shall look on Me they have pierced and mourn"… This
comes up again in Revelation ch.1. It is used to show that the
Jews will one day come to see that Jesus was their Messiah, that
they killed him, and to mourn over it. "Pierced" is used
many times in the Old Testament and just means killed, or died
a violent death by the sword.
In the Jerusalem Bible (not the R.C. one; but that done by Jews)
the words are:… "and they shall look towards Me, regarding
those whom the nations have thrust through." And it goes on
to speak of the mourning for those people by the various houses
of Israel. This is right for the context of the time the book of
Zachariah was written.
Ask your self - according what we have in the old testament scriptures
and even adding the traditions and teachings of the rabbis what
kind of person were the Jews expecting to come as Messiah, and
if Jesus did not fulfil those expectations that are recorded in
part in the songs of Mary and Zechariah (John's father) and the
statements of Simeon and Anna, how can they be blamed for rejecting
him?
Jeremiah and Ezekiel in particular, and the other prophets of
the time of the exiles were hoping for a restoration of the monarchy,
the nation in its land again, and the building of the temple again.
They expected a king of the line of David to rule again, Israel
to be great again, a time of peace and prosperity and the nations
to be drawn to Judaism and come to worship at Jerusalem. The Messiah
was a person waiting to come to do these things.
Those things had not happened by the time of Jesus (nor have they
come to completion) and the people, oppressed in their own land
by successive occupiers, were desperate for the Messiah to come.
Every mother descended from the line of David (and there must have
been many as both he and Solomon were prolific) prayed that her
son would be the one awaited.
There are two ideas of Messiah in Judaism - one is the Davidic
warrior king descended from David who came to restore everything
and build the fallen "tent or tabernacle or temple" again.
The other comes from Joseph and dies in the end time catastrophic
war to achieve the restoration (see Dead Sea scrolls War scroll
which can be found on the net.). This figure does not suffer and
the Jews have never equated him with the suffering servant in Isaiah
53. He does not come to redeem the individual sinner, but the whole
nation from oppression and poverty.
The restoration is not just of Israel and the monarchy but leads
to the restoration of Paradise or Eden for the world - these ideas
are applied to Jesus in revelation ch. 2, 3, and 21, 22.
If he does return to do all promised remains to be seen, but so
far he has not done any of the expected things. The genealogies
at the beginning of Matthew and Luke's gospels (which do not agree
either with each other or the one in Chronicles for David's line)
are there, presumably to substantiate the claim that he was a Davidic
Messiah, which he patently was not, yet the gospels are painting
a picture more like the Joseph messiah who dies in the struggle,
yet is victorious.
This is just total confusion, and coupled with no references to
Daniel 9 or Isaiah 53 in the gospels which relate to a Messiah,
no wonder so few Jews are convinced when missionaries try to use
those verses to evangelise them!
Here is q uoted a summary by Maimonides the highly respected medieval
Jewish theologian on the subject of Messiah:
"The Messiah will arise and restore the kingdom of David
to its former might. He will rebuild the sanctuary and gather the
dispersed of Israel. All the laws will be reinstituted in his days
as of old. Sacrifices will be offered and the Sabbatical and Jubilee
years will be observed exactly in accordance with the commandments
of the Torah. But whoever does not believe in him or does not await
his coming, denies not only the rest of the prophets, but also
the Torah and our teacher Moses.
Do not think the Messiah needs to perform signs and miracles to
bring about the new state of things in the world, revive the dead,
and the like. It is not so, … rather it is the case in these
matters that the statutes of our Torah are valid forever and eternally.
Nothing can be added to them or taken away from them. And if there
arise a king from the house of David who meditates on the Torah
and practices its commandments like his ancestor David in accordance
with the written and oral law, and prevails on all Israel to walk
in the ways of the Torah and repair its breaches (i.e. to eliminate
the bad state of affairs resulting from the incomplete observance
of its laws) and fights the battles of the Lord, one may rightly
assume he is the Messiah.
If he is then successful in rebuilding the sanctuary on its site
and gathering the dispersed of Israel he has then (as a result
of his success) proved himself to be the Messiah. He will then
arrange the whole world to serve only God, as it is said " I
will create a pure language for all the peoples, that they may
call on the name of God, and serve him with one accord" (Zeph.
3 v9)………………
In that age there will be neither famine nor war, nor envy nor
strife, but there will be an abundance of worldly goods. The whole
world will be occupied solely with the knowledge of God. Therefore
the children of Israel will be great sages; they will know hidden
things and attain an understanding of their C reator, to the extent
of human capability: " For the earth shall be full of the
glory of God as the waters cover the sea." (Is. 11 v 9)"
The Messiah in Jewish thought has nothing to do with the redemption
of the individual soul : that is already in Torah.
Judge for yourself: is Jesus the Messiah the Jews expect? Did
he do anything in his life or death to prove it?
The use of "Christ" in the Gospels.
If the man called Jesus did not, according to the gospels we have,
do anything to justify being called the Messiah by the Jews why
do we have the term apparently used in the scriptures passed on
to us?
It seems the word Christos which is the Greek equivalent of Messiah
of Hebrew could have been confused with "chrestos" which
means good, kind, gracious. (It was a name commonly given to slaves
or servants). The difference is only one letter; the third. In
chrestos it is like an n with a long tail, and in Christos it is
like an " i " without the dot.
So copyists could have made a mistake or the letter could have
become indistinct.
So now we go through all the references trying out the substitution
to see if it makes sense and is a possibility.
Also it should be borne in mind that the Hebrew for a good teacher
or good and for good holy man is tzedek - perhaps this what was
originally written and the Greek word for good (chrestos) written
and became changed to Christos as Messiah later.
Matthew:
1.v16 …..Is born Jesus who is called christ (anointed)
(Chrestos, good).
2.v4…. where christ (the anointed) (the good one)
should be born
11v2 Now John had heard in prison the works of christ (the
anointed) (chrestos, the good one)
16v16 Simon Peter answered and said, "thou art the christ
(the anointed) (the good) son of the living God."
16v20 Then charged he his disciples that they tell no man that
he was the christ (the anointed) (good) This
again could be that he did not want his disciples to say he was
the messiah awaited by the Jews, because he knew he was
not.
23v8 Be not ye called rabbi; for one is your master, christ
(the anointed) (the good one); but here in this
context it could mean a servant because Jesus taught that
the leader must serve the others.
24v5 Many will come in my name saying I am the christ (the
anointed) (good one) and deceive many. Possibly here it
really was "messiah"!
24v23 If any say, lo, here is christ (the anointed) (the good
one), or there, believe it not, for there shall arise many
false christs. Here again possibly the original was speaking
of messiahs.
26 v63 …. tell us whether thou be the christ (the anointed)
(good one)? This could be to confirm his usual
title, or asking if he believed himself to be the messiah.
26v68 … prophesy to us thou christ (anointed) (good) who
smote thee?
There seems to be a progression through Matthew from a description
of Jesus' character (or even his Greek name!) to where
the title of Messiah is used more (by others than himself).
Mark:
8v29 Jesus asked the disciples "Who do you say that I am?" Peter
answered and said to him " thou art the christ (anointed)(good)" This
again seems to mean Peter was saying he was messiah, but
Jesus tells them not to say this.
9v41 …because ye belong to christ (the anointed) (good)
12v35 How say the scribes that christ (the anointed)(the good
one) is the son of David? Here the context shows
Jesus is speaking of the Messiah and proving that they were wrong
to expect the Messiah to be a son of David.
14v61… art thou christ (the anointed) (the good) son
of the Blessed?
15v32 Let christ (the anointed) (good), the King of Israel
descend now from the cross. This could be referring to
his name, or that he was supposed to be the Messiah so……!
The book of Mark is more straightforward in this matter of
the use of the term Christ and does not show the change
as in Matthew. Mark is thought to be earlier than Matthew or
Luke.
Luke:
2v11 For unto you is born this day in the city of David a saviour
(Jesus being the Greek version of Joshua, which means " saviour")
which is christ (the anointed lord) (the good lord)
2v26 …. That he should not die before he had seen the Lord's christ
(anointed) (good). Here in context is does seem
to mean "messiah"
3v15 whether he were the christ (anointed)(good) or
not. Again here it means messiah.
4.41 the devils knew he was christ (anointed) (good) the
son of God. Here, once again, Jesus commands the devils
not to say he is messiah; although Luke comments that "the devils
knew he was Christ (messiah)".
9v20 Peter said: thou art the christ (anointed) (good one)
of God. Here again it seems to mean messiah and again
Jesus tells them not to say this to anyone.
22v 67 ..art thou the christ (anointed) (good)? Here
again it is a question of is he the messiah?
23v2… saying that he himself is christ (anointed)(the
good) a king. Both kings and high priests were anointed.
23v35… let him save himself if he be christ (anointed)(the
good) chosen of God This only shows they wanted
to see a miracle.
23v39.. if thou be christ (anointed)(good) save thyself
and us. They, too, wanted a miracle!
24v26 ought not the christ(anointed) (the good) to have
suffered? Jesus is speaking of the suffering servant
who died because of the sinfulness of others; but NOT in their
place. (see study on Isaiah 53.) This was the fate of many
of the prophets who were also ignored and persecuted.
24 v46 it behoved christ (anointed) (the good)
Again Luke uses the term himself for others to call Jesus,
but has Jesus deny it.
John:
1v17… truth and grace came by Jesus christ (the anointed)
(the good one)
1v20 John the Baptist said: I am not the christ(anointed) (good
one)
1v41 Andrew said … to his brother…" we have found the "messias" (word
in Greek meaning the mediator) which is interpreted as the
christ (the anointed) (the good). This is a strange comment
that a mediator is a messiah. This was not the Jewish idea of
the messiah or even of a priest, but the Greek. In fact Cruden's
dictionary has no entries for" mediator" in the OT
at all! The Hebrew only has a word which really means an interpreter
or go-between. What Andrew probably meant was that they had found
the one who could mediate in the sense of teach and interpret
the truths of the Torah so they could understand.
3v28 I am not the christ (anointed)(good one) but am sent…(John
the Baptist)
4.25 the messias (again actually word in Greek here means
mediator) called christ (anointed)(good)? So here it
is again as with Andrew: "one who will tell us all things." This
is not the Jewish Messiah, but one anointed to be a great teacher.
4v 29 Come see a man who told me all the things I ever did. Is
this not the Christ (the anointed)(good one)?
4v42 … We have heard him ourselves and know this is indeed
the christ (anointed) (good one) the saviour of the world. The
messiah was not to be the saviour of the world, but of the Jews,
in Jewish minds; but these were Samaritans.
7v27 Howbeit we know this man from whence he is, when christ
(the anointed) (good)cometh no man knoweth whence he is. They
seem to speak of the messiah, yet it was said the messiah would
be born of David's line, see below: verse 42!
7v31 when christ(the anointed)(the good) cometh will he
do more? Again they speak of the messiah.
7v41 others said this is the christ (anointed)(good one)
7.41 shall christ (good) come out of Galilee? "Does
anything good come out of Nazareth (Galilee)!"John 1 v 46.
The strange thing is that Nazareth probably did not exist as
a place then at all.
7v42 Christ (the anointed)(the good one) cometh of the
seed of David
9v22 if any man confesseth that he was christ (the anointed)(the
good one) he should be put out of the synagogue i.e. that
anyone saying he was the messiah should be expelled from the
synagogue.
10v24 If thou be the christ (the anointed) (good one) tell
us. Jesus answered that his works witnessed to what he was.
They were not the works of the messiah.
11v27 Martha: I believe thou art the christ (the anointed)
(good one), the son of God, that should come into the world. This
is an answer to a question not asked, and his reply is not recorded,
suggesting this is an addition.
12v34 The people said that christ (the anointed)(good) abideth
for ever. This was in reply to Jesus' warning that he was going
to die.
17v3 Jesus christ whom thou hast sent. Here Jesus seems
to be using both his titles of saviour, and the anointed or good
one. This is the latest gospel, and this may be an addition.
20v31 Believe that Jesus is the christ (the anointed)(good
one). This is the reason for the writing of John's
gospel. This is the latest gospel and the one which has
moved furthest from the person of Jesus as man towards Jesus
as God, the one who was "sent".
next section : Versions and languages
|
