Are There Specific References To Jesus Christ Prior To His Birth?

[omni]

The BoM is full of very specific references to Christ prior to his birth.  Why do we not similar references to "Jesus Christ" in the OT?  What other ancient literature (pre-Christ) uses his name in reference to a savior or messianic figure?

[BCSpace]

Given your conditions, I would accept:

 

The sceptre shall not depart from Judah, nor a lawgiver from between his feet, until Shiloh come; and unto him shall the gathering of the people be.

Genesis 49:10

 

A Lawgiver to take over from Judah, seems quite Messianic to me.

 

See also:

 

https://www.lds.org/scriptures/tg/jesus-christ-prophecies-about?lang=eng

[Judd]

I'd like to emphasize that far too often we argue with our Protestant and Catholic friends about the Bible "in as far as it is translated correctly." We often argue how "things" may have been left out, changed or distorted. In all this arguing, we never really clarify the largest thing, in my opinion, that constitutes these "things": the specific knowledge Christ and a savior before his birth. Unless you're reading the OT with a large Christian bias, it's hard to make a lot of the connections. The Book of Mormon lays this out pretty clear that the specific idea of a savior and his mission was, at many times, not a vague concept. So, to me, to use the BOM in comparison with the OT in that regard doesn't tell too much, unless the argument is that this is a post-NT concoction.

[Duncan]

I would imagine to do that you would have to have what scriptures were available to the Jews of Jesus's time. An example would be in Luke 4:16-24 but he called them to repentance! so they at least knew someone was coming, they didn't figure it was a local person and today is the day to repent!

Edited April 13, 2014 by Duncan

[hagoth7]

Daniel 9:26 And after threescore and two weeks shall ^aMessiah be cut off,

[Kevin Christensen]

The BoM is full of very specific references to Christ prior to his birth.  Why do we not similar references to "Jesus Christ" in the OT?  What other ancient literature (pre-Christ) uses his name in reference to a savior or messianic figure?

See http://publications.maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1459&index=4

Also things like:

http://www.margaretbarker.com/Papers/JesusAndTheJubilee.pdf

and this:

http://www.theway.org.uk/back/431Barker.pdf

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Bethel Park, PA

[omni]

Perhaps I wasn't very clear, I'm looking for examples of the name "Jesus Christ".  The BoM is filled with its usage, one would expect to see examples of it in the OT or other religious writings of the time.

Kevin, thanks for the links - it might take me a little while to read them.  Do they mention any specific examples?

[Kevin Christensen]

Perhaps I wasn't very clear, I'm looking for examples of the name "Jesus Christ".  The BoM is filled with its usage, one would expect to see examples of it in the OT or other religious writings of the time.

Kevin, thanks for the links - it might take me a little while to read them.  Do they mention any specific examples?

Jesus is a name, and Christ is a title meaning "the anointed". "Christ" is from the Greek for anointed, and "Messiah" is from the Hebrew for the anointed one. There are translation issues at work with Jesus, which would be Yeshua in Aramaic, and is equivalent to Joshua in Hebrew. And there are other translation and transmission layers in both the Bible and in the Book of Mormon which is a translation. The links I provided for First Temple theology have that context in mind. The context that Margaret Barker provides, is, I think, the key to everything, including a clearer idea of what we should expect to find in the current Old Testament.

For instance:

According to the great Isaiah scroll from Qumran, the

mysterious servant of the LORD was an anointed

man, but the Masoretic Hebrew has a disfigured man (Isa.52.14). This difference requires removing, or adding, one letter to the end of the word. The Christians understood the

word as ‘anointed’ and said this was a prophecy of Jesus, but the Masoretic text excludes this understanding. The Targum of Isaiah, however, the Aramaic translation made by a

Jew, did have a text that said ‘anointed’. So too the texts of Deuteronomy 32.8 and 32.43 are different in the Qumran and Masoretic forms, and in each case, the Masoretic text

excludes the Christian interpretation of the verse.

From this we could conclude that the Masoretic Hebrew text is not reliable as evidence of the scriptures that the Hebrew Christians knew and used, and so not the best source for what

they knew about the first temple and its teachings.

http://www.margaretbarker.com/Papers/RestoringSolomon.pdf

In the Deuteronomist De-Christianizing essay, I linked, I point out the connections between Barker's discussion of the mark of anointing in Ezekiel, and the discussion of the related "mark" in Jacob 4.

In her book on Revelation, she discusses this passage from Zechariah 6:

Then take silver and gold, and make crowns, and set them upon the head of Joshua the son of Josedech, the high priest;

12 And speak unto him, saying, Thus speaketh the Lord of hosts, saying, Behold the man whose name is The Branch; and he shall grow up out of his place, and he shall build the temple of the Lord:

13 Even he shall build the temple of the Lord; and he shall bear the glory, and shall sit and rule upon his throne; and he shall be a priest upon his throne: and the counsel of peace shall be between them both.

Barker notes that translating the Hebrew as Joshua and the New Testament Greek as Jesus obscures the fact that they are the same name. Does it matter? I don't know, but the translation obscures the question.

Charlesworth's earlier essay is also useful.

https://rsc.byu.edu/archived/reflections-mormonism-judaeo-christian-parallels/7-messianism-pseudepigrapha-and-book

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

Edited April 14, 2014 by Kevin Christensen

[omni]

Jesus is a name, and Christ is a title meaning "the anointed". "Christ" is from the Greek for anointed, and "Messiah" is from the Hebrew for the anointed one. There are translation issues at work with Jesus, which would be Yeshua in Aramaic, and is equivalent to Joshua in Hebrew. And there are other translation and transmission layers in both the Bible and in the Book of Mormon which is a translation. The links I provided for First Temple theology have that context in mind. The context that Margaret Barker provides, is, I think, the key to everything, including a clearer idea of what we should expect to find in the current Old Testament.

For instance:

http://www.margaretbarker.com/Papers/RestoringSolomon.pdf

In the Deuteronomist De-Christianizing essay, I linked, I point out the connections between Barker's discussion of the mark of anointing in Ezekiel, and the discussion of the related "mark" in Jacob 4.

In her book on Revelation, she discusses this passage from Zechariah 6:

Barker notes that translating the Hebrew as Joshua and the New Testament Greek as Jesus obscures the fact that they are the same name. Does it matter? I don't know, but the translation obscures the question.

Charlesworth's earlier essay is also useful.

https://rsc.byu.edu/archived/reflections-mormonism-judaeo-christian-parallels/7-messianism-pseudepigrapha-and-book

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

Thanks, I'll try to digest this all.

[Okrahomer]

See http://publications.maxwellinstitute.byu.edu/fullscreen/?pub=1459&index=4

Also things like:

http://www.margaretbarker.com/Papers/JesusAndTheJubilee.pdf

and this:

http://www.theway.org.uk/back/431Barker.pdf

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Bethel Park, PA

 

I'm "working" my way through your fascinating first article.  I've never heard of or read about the term "the diagonal cross."  In the article you quote Margaret Barker with this: 

 

"The rabbis also remember that the anointed high priests of the first temple had been anointed on the forehead with the sign of a diagonal cross. This diagonal cross was the sign of the Name on their foreheads, the mark which Ezekiel described as the letter tau."

 

 

And then you say:

 

"This must be the meaning of Jacob's mark; therefore, it quite literally meant for Book of Mormon peoples to take upon themselves the name of Christ—that is, the name of the anointed."

 

 

Online sources indicate that the diagonal cross is an "X", as in the Roman numeral representing "10."  I also see that the Hebrew letter "tau" was derived from the Phoenician letter "taw" which was an "X."  Did the use of the diagonal cross as a symbol of "the name of the anointed" survive the First Temple at all?  Are there any Christian groups today who use this letter as a symbol of the Christ?

[Kevin Christensen]

I'm "working" my way through your fascinating first article.  I've never heard of or read about the term "the diagonal cross."  In the article you quote Margaret Barker with this: 

 

 

And then you say:

 

 

Online sources indicate that the diagonal cross is an "X", as in the Roman numeral representing "10."  I also see that the Hebrew letter "tau" was derived from the Phoenician letter "taw" which was an "X."  Did the use of the diagonal cross as a symbol of "the name of the anointed" survive the First Temple at all?  Are there any Christian groups today who use this letter as a symbol of the Christ?

When I was growing up, we still saw a lot of Merry X-mas cards and signs. The use has faded because in the course of time, our society stopped seeing what X-mas meant. It was deemed disrespectful, no more than an abbreviation with an un-comprehended history.

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

[MiserereNobis]

Online sources indicate that the diagonal cross is an "X", as in the Roman numeral representing "10."  I also see that the Hebrew letter "tau" was derived from the Phoenician letter "taw" which was an "X."  Did the use of the diagonal cross as a symbol of "the name of the anointed" survive the First Temple at all?  Are there any Christian groups today who use this letter as a symbol of the Christ?

 

St. Francis and the Franciscans use the "Tau Cross."  I have a Rosary that uses this cross.  It looks kinda like this (sorry it's so big):

 

[MiserereNobis]

When I was growing up, we still saw a lot of Merry X-mas cards and signs. The use has faded because in the course of time, our society stopped seeing what X-mas meant. It was deemed disrespectful, no more than an abbreviation with an un-comprehended history.

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

 

I've heard people say that X-mas took Christ's name out of Christmas and was therefore a bad thing.  They didn't realize that it was a short-hand for Christ, like the Chi Rho:

 

 

There is also the Saint Andrew's Cross, which is an X.

 

P.S.  Thinking of Christmas reminded me how some people say, "Let's put Christ back into Christmas."  I wholeheartedly agree, but I also want to add: "Let's put Mass back into Christmas"

[Okrahomer]

St. Francis and the Franciscans use the "Tau Cross."  I have a Rosary that uses this cross.  It looks kinda like this (sorry it's so big):

 

 

 

Thank you, MiserereNobis! 

[Okrahomer]

When I was growing up, we still saw a lot of Merry X-mas cards and signs. The use has faded because in the course of time, our society stopped seeing what X-mas meant. It was deemed disrespectful, no more than an abbreviation with an un-comprehended history.

FWIW

Kevin Christensen

Pittsburgh, PA

 

I had no idea!  I was definitely among the group who believed it was somehow disrepectful--a way to take Christ out of Christmas.  Thank you (and MiserereNobis) for clarifying the meaning!

Edited April 14, 2014 by Okrahomer