Jesus not the Messiah?

[Veritas6]

Hello, what do we Catholics make of these claims from Judaism about Christ as the Messiah?:

“The claim that Jesus will fulfill the Messianic prophesies when he returns does not give him any credibility for his ‘first’ coming. The Bible never speaks about the Messiah returning after an initial appearance. The ‘second coming’ theory is a desperate attempt to explain away Jesus’ failure. The Biblical passages which Christians are forced to regard as second coming don’t speak of someone returning, they have a ‘first coming’ perspective.

According to the Jewish Bible, the Messiah must be a descendent of King David. (Jeremiah 23:5, 33:17; Ezekiel 34:23-24) Although the Greek Testament traces the genealogy of Joseph (husband of Mary) back to David, it then claims that Jesus resulted from a virgin birth, and, that Joseph was not his father. (Mat. 1:18-23) In response, it is claimed that Joseph adopted Jesus, and passed on his genealogy via adoption.

There are two problems with this claim:

1. There is no Biblical basis for the idea of a father passing on his tribal line by adoption. A priest who adopts a son from another tribe cannot make him a priest by adoption;
2. Joseph could never pass on by adoption that which he doesn’t have. Because Joseph descended from Jeconiah (Mat. 1:11) he fell under the curse of that king that none of his descendants could ever sit as king upon the throne of David. (Jeremiah 22:30; 36:30).

To answer this difficult problem, apologists claim that Jesus traces himself back to King David through his mother Mary, who allegedly descends from David, as shown in the third chapter of Luke. There are four basic problems with this claim:

1. There is no evidence that Mary descends from David. The third chapter of Luke traces Joseph’s genealogy, not Mary’s.
2. Even if Mary can trace herself back to David, that doesn’t help Jesus, since tribal affiliation goes only through the father, not mother. Cf. Num. 1:18; Ezra 2:59.
3. Even if family line could go through the mother, Mary was not from a legitimate Messianic family. According to the Bible, the Messiah must be a descendent of David through his son Solomon ( II Sam. 7:14; I Chron. 17:11-14, 22:9-10, 28:4-6 ) The third chapter of Luke is useless because it goes through David’s son Nathan, not Solomon. (Luke 3:31)
4. Luke 3:27 lists Shealtiel and Zerubbabel in his genealogy. These two also appear in Matthew 1:12 as descendants of the cursed Jeconiah. If Mary descends from them, it would also disqualify her from being a Messianic progenitor.”

Jews for Judaism | The Jewish Concept of Messiah and the Jewish

 

[BartholomewB]

This is a question that we see quite often on these forums. Here’s a thread from just a few months ago that you may find interesting.

Why should the scribes have realized that Jesus is the Messiah? Sacred Scripture

I realize that there were prophecies regarding the Messiah but anyone can say he is the Messiah especially if he is well versed in the prophecies. Yes, of course, Jesus performed miracles and that should have been enough, I guess.

 

[Veritas6]

This is a question that we see quite often on these forums. Here’s a thread from just a few months ago that you may find interesting.

Thanks! Do you have any further reading on the above claims about the Messiah? What do we make of the second coming of the Messiah? It seems Joseph cannot pass his tribal line by adoption. How do we make sense of this and the claim the genealogy is from Mary, not Joseph?

 

[Vico]

…

The mystery of salvation was revealed. Romans 16

25 Now to him who is able to strengthen you according to my gospel and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery which was kept secret for long ages.

At the end of the parable of the wicked tenants, in Matthew 21

42 Jesus said to them, “Have you never read in the scriptures:
‘The very stone which the builders rejected
has become the head of the corner;
this was the Lord’s doing,
and it is marvelous in our eyes’?
43 Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a nation producing the fruits of it.

Psalm 118 (Excerpt)

21
I thank thee that thou hast answered me
and hast become my salvation.
22
The stone which the builders rejected
has become the head of the corner.
23
This is the Lord’s doing;
it is marvelous in our eyes.
24
This is the day which the Lord has made;
let us rejoice and be glad in it.
25
Save us, we beseech thee, O Lord!
O Lord, we beseech thee, give us success!
26
Blessed be he who enters in the name of the Lord!
We bless you from the house of the Lord.
27
The Lord is God,
and he has given us light.
Bind the festal procession with branches,
up to the horns of the altar!

Also notice the words in the Sanctus/Benedictus:

Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord.
Hosanna in the highest.

Isaiah 6

3 And one called to another and said:
“Holy, holy, holy is the Lord of hosts;
the whole earth is full of his glory.”

 

[po18guy]

Traditionally, they have asked for a sign. Since the sign of the prophet Jonah was not enough, the next one should be remarkable.

 

[Leferdion]

so…are the jews still waiting for the first coming of their messiah? apparently they themselves have no way of knowing with certainty who the messiah will be since they seem to have had many so-called messiahs or messiah candidates if you wish, who eventually dissapointed them. None of their military leader-type messiahs, renowned for leading rebellions against foreign occupation on holy land, ever succeeded or even had any impact on a global level as much as the poor carpenter Jesus of Nazareth, who they reject so strongly. None of those messiahs names are even known or remembered, yet they reject the one who after 2000 years is still known and has changed the course of human history forever. I wish them goodluck in waiting for their messiah, who unfortunately had already come 2000 years ago, preached and healed infront of their very eyes, but whom they rejected because he emphasised the Kingdom of which, He, Jesus the Christ was King, was not a physical kingdom but a spiritual one. When Jesus Christ comes the 2nd time, the jews will unmistakenly recognise Him, but then He will not come as merciful sheperd, but as just King, to separate sheep from goat

 

[BartholomewB]

The Catholic view of the “Messiah” question is set out in The Jewish People and their Sacred Scriptures in the Christian Bible, published by the Pontifical Biblical Commission in 2001, over the signature of the Commission’s president, the then Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger.

http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/c...on_cfaith_doc_20020212_popolo-ebraico_en.html

Here is a key excerpt:

1. The basic theological presupposition is that God’s salvific plan which culminates in Christ (cf. Ep 1:3-14) is a unity, but that it is realised progressively over the course of time. … Christian faith recognises the fulfilment, in Christ, of the Scriptures and the hopes of Israel, but it does not understand this fulfilment as a literal one. Such a conception would be reductionist. In reality, in the mystery of Christ crucified and risen, fulfilment is brought about in a manner unforeseen. It includes transcendence. Jesus is not confined to playing an already fixed role — that of Messiah — but he confers, on the notions of Messiah and salvation, a fullness which could not have been imagined in advance; he fills them with a new reality; one can even speak in this connection of a “new creation”. It would be wrong to consider the prophecies of the Old Testament as some kind of photographic anticipations of future events. All the texts, including those which later were read as messianic prophecies, already had an immediate import and meaning for their contemporaries before attaining a fuller meaning for future hearers. The messiahship of Jesus has a meaning that is new and original.

 

[irenaeuslyons]

“Of whom Jeremiah speaks. Write this man dethroned; for there shall not spring of his seed one sitting on the throne of David. (Jer 22:30) How is this said of the Prophet, that none of the seed of Jeconias should reign? For if Christ reigned, and Christ was of the seed of Jeconiah, then has the Prophet spoken falsely. But it is not there declared that there shall be none of the seed of Jeconiah, and so Christ is of his seed; and that Christ did reign, is not in contradiction to the prophecy; for He did not reign with worldly honours, as He said, My kingdom is not of this world. (Jn 18:36)”
–St Ambrose of Milan

 

[porthos11]

And really, the Jews themselves are forced to find deeper fulfillments in their own prophecies.

When the Davidic kingdom ended, they had to figure out other, deeper fulfillments.

And today they have no Temple. Technically, they are in constant violation of Torah. So they also have to work around this. Hence the evolution from Second Temple to Pharisaic to Rabbinic Judaism.

They could hardly fault Christianity for simply, at the basic level, applying the same principles they do.

 

[JSRG]

Hello, what do we Catholics make of these claims from Judaism about Christ as the Messiah?:

“The claim that Jesus will fulfill the Messianic prophesies when he returns does not give him any credibility for his ‘first’ coming. The Bible never speaks about the Messiah returning after an initial appearance. The ‘second coming’ theory is a desperate attempt to explain away Jesus’ failure. The Biblical passages which Christians are forced to regard as second coming don’t speak of someone returning, they have a ‘first coming’ perspective.

Answered here:
http://restorersofzion.org/RT_answers_antim_Yeshuas-claim.htm#2

According to the Jewish Bible, the Messiah must be a descendent of King David. (Jeremiah 23:5, 33:17; Ezekiel 34:23-24) Although the Greek Testament traces the genealogy of Joseph (husband of Mary) back to David, it then claims that Jesus resulted from a virgin birth, and, that Joseph was not his father. (Mat. 1:18-23) In response, it is claimed that Joseph adopted Jesus, and passed on his genealogy via adoption.

There are two problems with this claim:

1. There is no Biblical basis for the idea of a father passing on his tribal line by adoption. A priest who adopts a son from another tribe cannot make him a priest by adoption;
2. Joseph could never pass on by adoption that which he doesn’t have. Because Joseph descended from Jeconiah (Mat. 1:11) he fell under the curse of that king that none of his descendants could ever sit as king upon the throne of David. (Jeremiah 22:30; 36:30).

For #1:
TAAM - Objections from Anti-missionaries (see also the next point at #12 also)
For #2:
Response to the Fabulous Prophecies of the Messiah (the applicable section starts with “On the other hand, if the genealogy in Matthew is taken seriously”)

The subsequent arguments about why Mary allegedly didn’t work as a descendant of David are an argument again an answer different from the above notes, and thus do not need to be responded to.

 

[Veritas6]

Here’s more of the points from the website listed before:

1. “The Hebrew word “HaMashiach” (lit. the Messiah) describing a future anointed person to come does not appear anywhere in the Bible. Since the Bible makes no explicit reference to the Messiah, it is unlikely that it could be considered the most important concept in the Bible. Indeed, in Jewish thought, the Messianic idea is not the most crucial. However, in Christian thought, the Messiah is paramount - a difficulty in light of its conspicuous absence from scripture.
2. Where does the Jewish concept of Messiah come from? One of the central themes of Biblical prophecy is the promise of a future age of perfection characterized by universal peace and recognition of G-d. Isaiah 2:1-4; Zephaniah 3:9; Hosea 2:20-22; Amos 9:13-15; Isaiah 32:15-18, 60:15-18; Micah 4:1-4; Zechariah 8:23, 14:9; Jeremiah 31:33-34.
3. Many of these prophetic passages speak of a descendant of King David who will rule Israel during the age of perfection. Isaiah 11:1-9; Jeremiah 23:5-6, 30:7-10, 33:14-16; Ezekiel 34:11-31, 37:21-28; Hosea 3:4-5.
4. Since every King is a Messiah, by convention, we refer to this future anointed one as The Messiah. The above is the only description in the Bible of a Davidic descendant who is to come in the future. We will recognize the Messiah by seeing who the King of Israel is at the time of complete universal perfection.
5. The Bible never speaks about believing in the Messiah. Because his reign will be an historically verifiable reality, self-evident to any person, it won’t require belief or faith.
6. Because no person has ever fulfilled the picture painted in the Bible of this future King, Jewish people still await the coming of the Messiah.”

 

[JSRG]

Here’s more of the points from the website listed before:

1. “The Hebrew word “HaMashiach” (lit. the Messiah) describing a future anointed person to come does not appear anywhere in the Bible. Since the Bible makes no explicit reference to the Messiah, it is unlikely that it could be considered the most important concept in the Bible. Indeed, in Jewish thought, the Messianic idea is not the most crucial. However, in Christian thought, the Messiah is paramount - a difficulty in light of its conspicuous absence from scripture.

In the present, the importance of the Messiah seems rather downplayed. This was, from my understanding, not the case in the past, where there was a lot more attention paid to it. Some information can be found here:
http://restorersofzion.org/RT_answers_rabbincom.htm

It’s a lengthy article, but if you want the quick version of what it has to say:

“One of the most closely guarded secrets in the modern rabbinic community is the scope and nature of rabbinic comment on the Messiah. A quick glance at our table of contents will explain why: Many of the conclusions attributed to honored sages describe a Messiah embarrassingly similar to the life and claims of Yeshua of Nazareth, known to the Christians as Jesus Christ.”

Most of the rest of the objections listed are negated by the explanation of the Second Coming not having yet occurred.