Quote:
Originally Posted by Angelic Me!
and these men are the massengers --- Prophet--the choesn ones ..
and we all know that the prophet jesus is NOT the god child !! it just can`t be !! he was only the massenger .. between god and the poeple just to teach them and to wise them ...
well
|
This is incorrect. Christ
was (and this is speaking from a Christian perspective, so athiests and naysayers, please do not attack this statement) the God Child/Son of God.
What, then, are some of the credentials of the Messiah? Only a few can be listed below; there are many others. All of these passages were recognized by the early rabbis as referring to the Messiah:
Messiah was to be born at Bethlehem: Micah 5:1
Messiah would be from the tribe of Judah: Genesis 49:10
Messiah would present himself by riding on an ass: Zechariah 9:9
Messiah would be tortured to death: Psalm 22
Messiah would arrive before the destruction of the Second Temple: Daniel 9:24-27
Messiah's life would match a particular description, including suffering, silence at his arrest and trial, death and burial in a rich man's tomb, and resurrection: Isaiah 52:13-53:12
In detail as to lineage, birthplace, time, and lifestyle, Jesus matched the Messianic expectations of the Hebrew Scriptures. The record of this fulfillment is to be found in the pages of the New Testament. But several other factors combine to further substantiate the Messiahship of Jesus.
In the first place, he claimed to be the Messiah! When a woman said to him, "I know that Messiah is coming." he replied, "I who speak to you am he."1 Naturally, that doesn't prove anything one way or the other. But if Jesus had never made the claim to be the Messiah, why would we bother to try and prove that he was? His own claim lays the groundwork for the rest of the evidence.
Also, Jesus' life is in sharp contrast to that of the false Messiahs, and it is a positive demonstration of what we would expect the Messiah to do. Thus, Jesus worked many miracles of healing, bringing wholeness into people's lives, forgiving sin and restoring relationships. In contrast with Shabbetai Zevi, for instance, Jesus carried out the Law of Moses as a devout Jew. And in contrast with Bar Kochba, although Jesus also died, he was resurrected!
The resurrection is a third piece of additional evidence, and it is perhaps the most convincing vindication of Jesus' claims. It is interesting that an Israeli scholar, Pinchas Lapide, has written a book which has attracted no small amount of attention in the Jewish community. The reason is that Lapide has said that the resurrection of Jesus is well within the realm of possibility. After all, he reasoned, the Hebrew Scriptures give a number of accounts of people coming back to life. Why not Jesus as well? Regrettably, Lapide fails to note that the resurrection of Jesus is described in terms that go far beyond the resucitations of the other stories; and, he fails to come to grips with the fact that Jesus predicted his own resurrection, which vindicated his claims to Messiahship.
An assortment of explanations has been offered throughout history to explain away the resurrection as either non-historical ("It never happened.") or as non-supernatural ("Here's how it happened."). But these explanations have not been successful. Run down the possibilities for yourself and see which makes the best sense. Did the Roman authorities steal the body of Jesus from the tomb? Then why didn't they produce it when the word started being spread that Jesus was risen? Or maybe the disciples stole it. But could such a fabrication on their part account for the change in their attitude? Three days earlier they were disillusioned, defeated idealists who had hoped that Jesus would bring in a new world order; could a lie which they knew to be a lie, now account for their hope, their boldness in the face of official persecution, and for the high ethical standards they set?