What would Jews consider a 'messianic' verse.

So a pal just sent me this question:

So, while I appreciate the confidence I thought I’d throw it out there to get some opinions.

How 'bout it?

Just a little month-late bump.

Can someone give me some guidance here?

Hopefully, I understand your question correctly. Basically, it sounds like you’ve answered your own question! If true, that’s the best OP of them all! Seriously, though… The Jews do not acknowledge the “J” guy in any way, shape, or form. Any verse referring to him is not accepted as verse!

A better question to ask might be: What is a Messianic verse as opposed to a New Testament verse? Do the Messianics re-write the Old Testament with references to the “J” guy?

Basically, there’s Old Testament and New Testament, and ne’er the twain shall meet…except in the eyes of the Messianics.

  • Jinx

Jinx, Jews believe that a Messiah WILL COME – OP wants to know which scriptures lead to this belief.

Sorry. I thought he was asking about those that call themselves Messianic Jews vs. the belief in a Messiah. Sorry for the confusion! (i.e.: Star kist wants tuna that tastes good, not tuna with good taste!)

I may have some refs that answer this. Will post soon. There are prayers which speak of this, conditions which can make it happen, how he will come, and accepted beliefs regarding what will happen when he does come. But, I will see if I can post from where all this stems. -Jinx

From the “Jewish Book of Why (Vol II)”, the Book of Malachi states that Elijah is the “messenger of the Covenant” and Malachi prophesied “the Messianic Age would be heralded by a reappearance of Elijah.”

For some crazy reason, I was once taught that the Messiah must come by the Hebrew year 6000, or he will not come at all. Others tell me that goes against the 13 Principles of Faith which all Jews are supposed to accept unconditionally…one of which being the belief in the coming of the Messiah (with no deadline). - Jinx

Here is a list of the Jewish expectations of the Messiah with corresponding verses.

A lot of what Christians read as Messianic propheises in the OT are not read as such in Judaism.

Jewish Encyclopedia entry: Messiah (Much like the Catholic Encyclopedia of 1908 - 1917 that has been transcribed for the internet, the public domain version of the Jewish Encyclopedia of 1901 - 1906 has also been copied.)

For genuine Messianic prophesies in the Tanakh look here.

The only OT criterion for the Messiah which Jesus fulfilled was that he was Jewish. All the NT “fulfillments” are pretty much based on decontextualized fragments of non-Messianic verses from the Septuagint recast as “prophecies” of Jesus. In some cases, OT stuff was simply inserted into the Gospels to make literary points or fill gaps (Jesus is made to quote from Psalms 22 on the cross, for instance).

Since so much of the NT uses the OT as a hypotext it really isn’t very useful or telling to find “fulfilled” prophecies in the NT anyway. You have one literary tradition which openly cannibalizes a prior literary tradition to build its own mythology. The people who wrote the Gospels were working long after the fact and were using the Greek Septuagint as a source. They searched the OT for hints or scraps of knowledge about Jesus and wrote their own texts accordingly. Most of the stuff they decided was about Jesus had nothing to do with the Messiah when read in context and often was not even predictive prophecy at all.

Great post, D the G; succinct, thorough and great link. Thanks.

Recently, I read that Daniel had a three-part dream of which two parts came true. The third part is accepted as a prediction of the coming of a Messiah.

  • Jinx

The stuff that “came true” was written after the fact. Daniel is set during the Baylonian captivity but it was written during the Maccabean revolt against the Seleucid occupation (c. 167 BCE). It’s an apocalypse which uses the Babylonian captivity to speak allegorically about a revolt contemporaneous with the authorship of the book.

Daniel does contain a prediction of the Messiah but Daniel’s Messiah is a.) a human, not God, b.) was supposed to come and drive out Antiochus C.) was supposed to fulfill the Jewish expectations of the Messiah posted above.

Daniel made a genuine attempt at predictive prophecy, it just didn’t come true. The Jews did get rid of the Seleucids but the Messiah never came.

Daniel (like Revelation) is now endlessly reinterpreted and its imagery reconfigured in a variety of ways to force a Christian meaning into a text which simply has none.

There’s always the “dual prophecy” approach, though.
(BTW, I bumped this thread by accident. I was looking for a link which I was considering posting in a current GD thread on the same subject and I accidentally posted in the wrong thread. My apologies for the bump)

<slightly off-topic>

Reading this interesting link (Thanks, Diogenes!), it uses the prefix “he” all the time, but I’m not sure I see any actual scriptural requirement that the messiah be male. Is there such a requirement?

</slightly off-topic>

Yes. It is explicit that he will be a king.

Joke answer- any verse which can be applied to Jesus is not a Messianic verse.

Real answer- none of the Suffering Servant passages (such as Isaiah 53) or Psalm 22 (“My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?.. They tear at my hands and feet…”); but most all of the passages which C’tians would apply to the Second Coming. Diogenes’ list is a good reference. Interestingly, few if any of those passages use the term “Messiah”, some rather refer to “David” or a Davidic prince, some just refer to The LRD. We C’tians who do regard the Messiah as the LRD Incarnate enjoy that irony.