And BTW, does the advent of the Messiah have anything at all to do with Elijah actually showing up at the seder, for once? Does the one have to happen before the other, or simultaneously? Serious question.
And, why Elijah, who has nothing at all to do with the Exodus/Passover story? Why don’t Jews set a place and open the door for Moses?
Let’s not forget that we don’t have a copy of Jesus’s long form birth certificate indicating he’s actually a descendant of David.
And even then, there are these persistent questions regarding his paternity . . .
And the location of his birth.
He claims to have been a biblical scholar, but never released his yeshiva records, either.
Malachi (the book) says the Elijah will return first. As for “why not Moses,” Moses is dead. Elijah was caught up in a whirlwind and taken alive to heaven, where he is assumed to still be living.
Everybody listen to meee: I… might be the Messiah!
I am surprised that more people don’t name their child Messiah.
Also, Moses is not mentioned in the Seder.
If you take the geneology in Matthew, you find that Jesus is supposedly descended from Jeconiah, who was cursed in Jeremiah (22:28-30), with his descendants excluded from the kingship.
No, I don’t take any of this seriously. It is interesting though.
No, his name is Bwian and he’s been a very naughty boy.
If you take the geneology in Matthew, Jesus’ daddy is God and none of those listed are his ancestors.
“It’s 10 O’Clock: Where’s Your Messiah Now?”
First, they werent “priests” they were Rabbi’s
Christ threatened the “political/economical” structure of the Church. They chose to protect the “political/economical” Church then the Word. In other words, greed and power. Human failings.
Much like Church today. JMHO, but todays Religions are more concerned with the perpetuation of their political power, then the Word of God.
A rabbi is just a teacher. The OP was asking about the priests of Jerusalem, those who took care of the temple.
Some hayseed apocalyptic rabbi from out in the sticks threatened the power of the temple? How do you figure that? He was a nobody to them.
There can be only one. (Sanchez Villa-Lobos Ramirez:86)
I disagree. He was a threat to them. It is the very basis of His persecution
I disagree with that disagreement.
I believe he was prosecuted because of the claim he was king.
That’s insurrection, punishment by crucifixion is the norm for that.
Crucifixion is not a normal punishment for Jews with opposing (lithurgical) views.
But His claims, and what he was teaching didnt coincide with the Church at that time. And while I agree with the punishment comparison, He was creating a following that was pulling from the Church (not just in numbers but in teaching).
The “King” was the excuse.
JMHO
That is indeed the message you get from the gospels.
Views of course depend on how far you trust the gospels.
Are you sure that wasn’t Ramirez 2:91, formally designated as part of the Apocrypha?