Who is the Messiah supposed to be?

[polonius]

When Christians refer to the Messiah, they are referring to Jesus who is also thought to be a divine person.

However, the original Jewish concept, found the Old Testament, reports the Messiah to be a national leader, but not divine himself.

When did Christians begin to consider Jesus to be divine and how did the concept of a divine Holy Ghost develop?

[onewithhim]

When Christians refer to the Messiah, they are referring to Jesus who is also thought to be a divine person.

However, the original Jewish concept, found the Old Testament, reports the Messiah to be a national leader, but not divine himself.

When did Christians begin to consider Jesus to be divine and how did the concept of a divine Holy Ghost develop?

As for his "Divinity", scholars like Bart Erhmann claim such thinking began soon after his early folllowers experienced somthing they understood to be his resurrecton.

But I would ask, if God raised Jesus, how does that make Jesus "God"? Or the literal "Son of God".

Earlier claims of Jesus Divine Sonship* were writen retrospectively, as the Gospels were all penned after the resurrection experience.

-----------

Timothy has brought up a good point---what does "divine" mean to each person here? According to the dictionary, it simply means "of, relating to, or proceeding directly from God." This is the first definition, and it is what JWs believe. Jesus if "of" God, not God. He has proceeded directly from God, he is not God Himself.

Your observation is excellent where you said that "if God raised Jesus, how does that make Jesus God?" It's quite obvious from that that he could not be God. The Scriptures show that he is, however, the SON of God, just as he said to the Pharisees who falsely accused him of claiming to be God. (John 10:36)

[onewithhim]

When Christians refer to the Messiah, they are referring to Jesus who is also thought to be a divine person.

However, the original Jewish concept, found the Old Testament, reports the Messiah to be a national leader, but not divine himself.

I doubt that there is a way to definitively say who the Messiah was “supposed� to be. The Jewish scriptures are open to interpretation.

Most first century Jews viewed the messiah as a largely nationalistic political leader.

The Apostles presented a different interpretation of the Messiah, claiming that the Jewish scriptures pointed to a Messiah that would look beyond the bounds of Israel to be a light to the Gentiles and overcome the ultimate enemies of sin and death.

Both groups claimed they were presenting the accurate understanding of the Jewish scriptures. It is up to the individual to decide which understanding is more convincing.

When did Christians begin to consider Jesus to be divine and how did the concept of a divine Holy Ghost develop?

It is hard to say when Christian began to see Jesus as divine. If the book of Acts is accurate, then Peter claimed Jesus was divine at Pentecost (calling him “the Author of life�), 50 days after Jesus rose from the dead.

By the time we get to the first of Paul’s letters in the 50’s the divinity of Christ was already a well-established belief. Paul wrote about it in an off-handed manner, equating Jesus with the Father so casually that it seems likely his readers already knew about and accepted that belief.

Paul never "equated Jesus with the Father." That is a serious allegation, and it besmirches Paul's reputation. Paul always DISTINGUISHED BETWEEN God and Jesus. Even a casual reading of his letters will show the reader that he spoke of the God and Father of Jesus Christ. Jesus is always the Son and subordinate to the Father.

Remind me---which verse in Acts shows that Peter refers to Jesus as "the Author of life"?

[onewithhim]

This thread is interesting on this point: That people are still trying to figure out who Jesus is almost 2000 years after his death. That were trying to figure it out then and they are still not sure now.

This is an excellent though perhaps unintentional assertion of the failure of Christ's mission. People are still shaking their heads as to who or what he was! If he really were sent from God, it challenges the notion that God is omnipotent.

It is amusing to see that a way round the difficulty is to say only certain people know. This used to be a joke commonly made against Roman Catholics who thought they would be exclusive inheritors of heaven. For Catholics felt they knew. But then the folk across the street have a different view - they are the ones who know. And yet Christ condemned those who claim the top table for themselves. What a mess.

Well, I, personally, have no doubt about who Jesus is. It is pretty clear to me from the Scriptures, and it gets muddy only when pagan doctrines are melded by unscrupulous men into the fabric of true, untainted Christian belief.

There is no mess in Christ's true church. Outside of that, there is.

[onewithhim]

Peter knew who Jesus was. I know who Jesus was.

Peter opined that Jesus was the Son of God but we don't have Christ's view on whether this flattering remark was meant literally or figuratively.


In the end there is no certainty. Those who claim certainty are making a personal interpretation, The Creed asserts that Jesus and the Holy Spirit are God. Christ did not clarify anything so it is strange to hear that many people KNOW who Christ was.

We have Christ's view about his Son-ship throughout the Christian Greek Scriptures. He claimed to be the Son, no doubt about it. There IS certainty. The "Creed" is man-made. Why hang anything on that?

Christ did indeed clarify who he was (and is), and it's unfair to him to say that he didn't. It's also unfair to say that he claimed to be God, which trinitarians cannot prove except by unbelievably distorting the Scriptures.

[bjs]

Remind me---which verse in Acts shows that Peter refers to Jesus as "the Author of life"?

Acts 3:15

[Checkpoint]

[Replying to post 12 by onewithhim]

Remind me---which verse in Acts shows that Peter refers to Jesus as "the Author of life"?

Just to clarify what Peter meant in Acts 3:15.

From HELPS Word-studies

747 arxēgós(from 746 /arxḗ, "the first" and 71 /ág�, "to lead") – properly, the first in a long procession; a file-leader who pioneers the way for many others to follow.

747 (arxēgós) does not strictly mean "author," but rather "a person who is originator or founder of a movement and continues as the leader – i.e. 'pioneer leader, founding leader' " (L & N, 1, 36.6).

[polonius]

https://www.catholic.org/encyclopedia/view.php?id=10948

The title "son of God" was applied in the Old Testament to persons having any special relationship with God. Angels, just and pious men, the descendants of Seth, were called "sons of God" (Job 1:6; 2:1; Psalm 89:7; Wisdom 2:13; etc.). In a similar manner it was given to Israelites (Deuteronomy 14:50); and of Israel, as a nation, we read: "And thou shalt say to him: Thus saith the Lord: Israel is my son, my firstborn. I have said to thee: Let my son go, that he may serve me" (Exodus 4:22 sq.).

From Wikipedia Shema Yisrael ("Hear, [O] Israel") are the first two words of a section of the Torah, and is the title of a prayer that serves as a centerpiece of the morning and evening Jewish prayer services. The first verse encapsulates the monotheistic essence of Judaism: "Hear, O Israel: the LORD our God, the LORD is one" (Hebrew: שְ�מַע יִשְׂרָ�ֵל ה' �ֱלֹהֵינוּ ה' �ֶחָד‬), found in Deuteronomy 6:4, sometimes alternatively translated as "The LORD is our God, the L ORD alone." Observant Jews consider the Shema to be the most important part of the prayer services in Judaism, and its twice-daily recitation as a mitzvah (religious commandment). It is traditional for Jews to say the Shema as their last words, and for parents to teach their children to say it before they go to sleep at night.

The Jewish-Christian community remained a sect in orthodox Judaism. There was no objection to them claiming Jesus was the messiah (or a son of God). This can be found in Mark c70 AD, and Matthew and Luke c80 AD.

However, when the Christians began to claim that Jesus himself was divine, The Christians were excluded from Jewish synagogues as apostates from Judaism. This is reported in John’s gospel written about 95 AD

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birkat_haMinim

The Birkat ha-Minim is a Jewish curse on heretics (minim). Modern scholarship has generally evaluated that the Birkat haMinim probably did originally include Jewish Christians before Christianity became markedly a gentile religion. It is the 12th of the Eighteen Benedictions or Amidah.

[marco]

We have Christ's view about his Son-ship throughout the Christian Greek Scriptures. He claimed to be the Son, no doubt about it. There IS certainty. The "Creed" is man-made. Why hang anything on that?

The claim is therefore ambiguous. You choose which meaning you want. What we read is man made. Some believe it is God-inspired of course, just as some believe the Koran is the actual word of God. The Creed is an interpretation of Scripture just as your beliefs are an interpretation. There is no point in quoting original words to back your interpretation because then an argument follows as to the true meaning. For exampe a Catholic would say: "Thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church and the gates of hell will not prevail against it," is adequate confirmation that Peter was the first representative of Christ and future representatives woud have Christ's guarantee that they would not be overcome by Satan. You may disagree.

Christ did indeed clarify who he was (and is), and it's unfair to him to say that he didn't. It's also unfair to say that he claimed to be God, which trinitarians cannot prove except by unbelievably distorting the Scriptures.

Unfortunately "son of God" is ambiguous. He did not say: I am God but he did not clarify. I agree with you but that is a mere interpretation. Trinitarians make a strong point. Jesus could have made himself clearer but perhaps he didn't anticipate the notion of Trinity, which is a pity.

[bjs]

https://www.catholic.org/encyclopedia/view.php?id=10948

The title "son of God" was applied in the Old Testament to persons having any special relationship with God. Angels, just and pious men, the descendants of Seth, were called "sons of God" (Job 1:6; 2:1; Psalm 89:7; Wisdom 2:13; etc.). In a similar manner it was given to Israelites (Deuteronomy 14:50); and of Israel, as a nation, we read: "And thou shalt say to him: Thus saith the Lord: Israel is my son, my firstborn. I have said to thee: Let my son go, that he may serve me" (Exodus 4:22 sq.).

You have quoted this passage from the Catholic Encyclopedia before, but failed to address ways that it is problematic or misleading. I would point you back to this thread to see if you can defend the claim:
viewtopic.php?p=914318#914318

[bjs]

[Replying to post 16 by Checkpoint]

arxēgós is usually translated as: originator, author, or founder.

http://biblehub.com/greek/747.htm

I see little importance in the distinction. "Author of life" and "Founder of life" appear to mean essentially the same thing.