Does anyone have the list of requirements that need to be met for one to be declared Messiah? And also the testing involved and declaration.
?1. be G_d
I must be really slow -- the obvious? I'm just trying to understand what you're really saying.Oh dear, you guys just aint got no humour! Just stating the obvious!
I must be really slow -- the obvious? I'm just trying to understand what you're really saying.
It's obviously not a requirement for the Mashiach, from the Tanach, as far as I can see...?
Lulav, in general i think you can find what you're looking for here:
Judaism 101: Mashiach: The Messiah
What Will the Mashiach Do?
Before the time of the mashiach, there shall be war and suffering (Ezekiel 38:16)
The mashiach will bring about the political and spiritual redemption of the Jewish people by bringing us back to Israel and restoring Jerusalem (Isaiah 11:11-12; Jeremiah 23:8; 30:3; Hosea 3:4-5). He will establish a government in Israel that will be the center of all world government, both for Jews and gentiles (Isaiah 2:2-4; 11:10; 42:1). He will rebuild the Temple and re-establish its worship (Jeremiah 33:18). He will restore the religious court system of Israel and establish Jewish law as the law of the land (Jeremiah 33:15).
HTH
Oh dear, you guys just aint got no humour! Just stating the obvious!
I start with Tanach, and go forward. Jews start with Tanach, and go forward. In light of that, I must ask you again,It all depends where you start from.
I'm interested in what was believed in the first century. What were the things they were looking for? Andrew proclaims that Yeshua was the one they had been looking for. The priests and scribes came to test him many times. There must have been some protocol back then, way before Rambam.There is no direct reference to him in the Five Books of Moses and scant mention in the books of the Prophets. The Messiah is mentioned in various places in the Talmud, particularly in the end of the tractate Sanhedrian. Our present knowledge of who and what the Messiah is can be only found in basically one source and that is the Rambam's magnum opus, the Mishnah Torah, also known as the Yad HaChazakah.
A prophet will the L-RD thy God raise up unto thee, from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken; according to all that thou didst desire of the L-RD thy God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying: 'Let me not hear again the voice of the L-RD my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I die not.' And the L-RD said unto me: 'They have well said that which they have spoken. I will raise them up a prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee; and I will put My words in his mouth, and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto My words which he shall speak in My name, I will require it of him.
I start with Tanach, and go forward. Jews start with Tanach, and go forward. In light of that, I must ask you again,
where is that found in Tanach -- an actual verse which states that the Messiah who will come, must be G_d? I see no reason to consider the idea he would be, as "obvious"; the concept of a "Messiah" and especially THE Messiah, comes straight out of Judaism which does not accept any Christian texts nor teaching on the subject.
I don't find the question too broad. There are very specific requirements for the Jewish Messiah. Those specific requirements - the job description - are found in Tanach alone, and they're very clear. Why is it "too broad" to ask what the requirements are for the Jewish Messiah, considering any ideas of other requirements which come from any source other than Tanach, don't actually apply??
I'm interested in what was believed in the first century. What were the things they were looking for? Andrew proclaims that Yeshua was the one they had been looking for. The priests and scribes came to test him many times. There must have been some protocol back then, way before Rambam.
I am surprised that they believe that he is not spoken of in the Torah.
Then I would have to ask who do they think Moses is referring to here?
All agreed on that. Details and requirements varied and still vary. Important to note that "performing miracles" , in most interpretations are not on the list.[/quote] Of course, that is understood. What I am looking for is a list of requirements, genealogies, certain prophecies that should be fulfilled, etc.Based on everything we know people expected Messiah way before the first century.Even that the word itself isnt used in (what we refer to collectively as)the Bible.The concept was broad even back then,but, in essence,the consensus was that He is the King and Conqueror that will bring political and spiritual freedom to the Nation of Israel and the world.
Funny thing, the more I study this time period the more I am not convinced that he was poor as Christianity presents. I don't understand why it would seem shameful if he was leading a revolution against pagan Rome and was brought up on charges against the Empire?Thats why i brought up Rambam, he summarized all that. Religious bosses of the day could not beleive that the poor gangleader of a small bunch of young wanderers, especially considering his shameful, in their view, death, can possibly be Messiah the King. From the get go that disqualified him.
False Messiahs? I didn't post anything about that, but about a prophet to come? Where do you read anything about a false messiah here?As for words of Moses, of course there were, are , and will be false messiahs long after me and you turn into dust.
Bar Kohba,Tzadok, Fevda that is mentioned in Acts 5, etc..
This, I believe is speaking of the Messiah, not a false Messiah.A prophet will the L-RD thy God raise up unto thee, from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken; according to all that thou didst desire of the L-RD thy God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying: 'Let me not hear again the voice of the L-RD my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I die not.' And the L-RD said unto me: 'They have well said that which they have spoken. I will raise them up a prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee; and I will put My words in his mouth, and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto My words which he shall speak in My name, I will require it of him.
Yes,I have seen that. I believe it doesn't have to be one or the other though, but both. I read the Bible, the words from HaShem to have more than one meaning.Also, the interesting moment - Isaiah 53.WHo is the one that it talks about ? That is what required a lot of jumping thru hoops from Judaism side to try to explain....
Oh, dear, of course. I didnt mean you mentioned false messiahs, i meant to say- Those (and others) scriptures and the whole concept of messiah been so widely understood and interpreted and disagreed upon between religious leaders,learned scholars and people in general , that many false Messiahs have risen and many times some people were deceived into believing that they were true Ones, if for a while.False Messiahs? I didn't post anything about that, but about a prophet to come?Where do you read anything about a false messiah here?
A prophet will the L-RD thy God raise up unto thee, from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken; according to all that thou didst desire of the L-RD thy God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying: 'Let me not hear again the voice of the L-RD my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I die not.' And the L-RD said unto me: 'They have well said that which they have spoken. I will raise them up a prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee; and I will put My words in his mouth, and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto My words which he shall speak in My name, I will require it of him.This, I believe is speaking of the Messiah, not a false Messiah.
I believe it doesn't have to be one or the other though, but both. I read the Bible, the words from HaShem to have more than one meaning.
Funny thing, the more I study this time period the more I am not convinced that he was poor as Christianity presents. I don't understand why it would seem shameful if he was leading a revolution against pagan Rome and was brought up on charges against the Empire?