Trump the 'annointed one'

[oxmixmudd]

From - https://www.biblestudytools.com/dictionary/anointing/

Source: above

...

2. Religious Use:

Anointing as a religious rite was practiced throughout the ancient East in application both to persons and to things.

(1) It was observed in Canaan long before the Hebrew conquest, and, accordingly, Weinel (Stade's Zeutschrift, XVIII, 50) holds that, as the use of oil for general purposes in Israel was an agricultural custom borrowed from the Canaanites, so the anointing with sacred oil was an outgrowth from its regular use for toilet purposes. It seems more in accordance with the known facts of the case and the terms used in description to accept the view set forth by Robertson Smith (Religion of the Semites, 2nd ed., 233, 383; compare Wellhausen, Reste des arabischen Heidenthums, 2nd ed., 125) and to believe that the cukh or use of oil for toilet purposes, was of agricultural and secular origin, and that the use of oil for sacred purposes, mashach, was in origin nomadic and sacrificial. Robertson Smith finds the origin of the sacred anointing in the very ancient custom of smearing the sacred fat on the altar (matstsebhah), and claims, rightly it would seem, that from the first there was a distinct and consistent usage, distinguishing the two terms as above.

(2) The primary meaning of mashach in Hebrew, which is borne out by the Arabic, seems to have been "to daub" or "smear." It is used of painting a ceiling in Jeremiah 22:14, of anointing a shield in Isaiah 21:5, and is, accordingly, consistently applied to sacred furniture, like the altar, in Exodus 29:36 and Daniel 9:24, and to the sacred pillar in Genesis 31:13:

"where thou anointedst a pillar."

(3) The most significant uses of mashach, however, are found in its application, not to sacred things, but to certain sacred persons. The oldest and most sacred of these, it would seem, was the anointing of the king, by pouring oil upon his head at his coronation, a ceremony regarded as sacred from the earliest times, and observed religiously not in Israel only, but in Egypt and elsewhere (see Judges 9:8,15; 1 Samuel 9:16; 10:1; 2 Samuel 19:10; 1 Kings 1:39,45; 2 Kings 9:3,6; 11:12). Indeed such anointing appears to have been reserved exclusively for the king in the earliest times, which accounts for the fact that "the Lord's anointed" became a synonym for "king" (see 1 Samuel 12:3,5; 26:11; 2 Samuel 1:14; Psalms 20:6). It is thought by some that the practice originated in Egypt, and it is known to have been observed as a rite in Canaan at a very early day. Tell el-Amarna Letters 37 records the anointing of a king.

(4) Among the Hebrews it was believed not only that it effected a transference to the anointed one of something of the holiness and virtue of the deity in whose name and by whose representative the rite was performed, but also that it imparted a special endowment of the spirit of Yahweh (compare 1 Samuel 16:13; Isaiah 61:1). Hence the profound reverence for the king as a sacred personage, "the anointed" (Hebrew, meshiach YHWH), which passed over into our language through the Greek Christos, and appears as "Christ".

(5) In what is known today as the Priestly Code, the high priest is spoken of as "anointed" (Exodus 29:7; Leviticus 4:3; 8:12), and, in passages regarded by some as later additions to the Priestly Code, other priests also are thus spoken of (Exodus 30:30; 40:13-15). Elijah was told to anoint Elisha as a prophet (1 Kings 19:16), but seems never to have done so. 1 Kings 19:16 gives us the only recorded instance of such a thing as the anointing of a prophet. Isaiah 61:1 is purely metaphorical (compare Dillmann on Leviticus 8:12-14 with ICC on Numbers 3:3; see also Nowack, Lehrbuch der hebraischen Archaologie, II, 124).

© Copyright Original Source

[Mountain Man]

...the waves of disrespect and hate that flow so continuously from you, pix, and others my way...

The fact that you make such a statement is why I cautioned to "make absolutely certain that you have correctly discerned the actions and/or motives of a fellow believer" before casting judgement on them. You claim that your lengthy post #84 was an attempt at opening up dialog, but then you make statements like the following:

"If someone is supporting Trumps immigration policies where they constitute cruelty, and we get into a discussion of whether or not they are wrong, and I point out that God requires us to welcome the stranger, and to care for the poor, this is interpreted as 'doubting their Christian faith'."

That you think this is an accurate representation of your interactions with your fellow Christians on this forum was enough to tell me that any such discussion was pointless.

[NorrinRadd]

Ok, after being here for years, I *just now* discovered how to jump directly to a particular page in a thread. Duh.

I never saw Obama being called a messiah. ...

As usual, Rogue has thoroughly documented. It's available in this thread, several pages back.

[NorrinRadd]

I posted on Facebook links to both the Fox News article and the blog post that formed its basis. I have not gotten much action there so far.

[lilpixieofterror]

It is always so wonderful to have 45 minutes of thoughtful effort in a post to try to actually see if thoughtful discussion can possibly tear down the waves of disrespect and hate that flow so continuously from you, pix, and others my way, only to have it dismissed once again with yet more of the same.

Touche. I am truly the fool today. You may bask in your victory.

I will try not to be such a fool tomorrow.

Sorry, don’t hate you, but you’re more than welcome to keep playing the victim and pretending you have done nothing wrong. I have never been a racist, that was dishonest and you still refuse to say sorry. I did not post a single anti science thing and least you said sorry for your more ridiculous accusation there, but it still shows you are somewhat responsible yourself. You’re not the victim, so stop pretending you are.

[seanD]

And yet you and other liberals didn't have a word to say about the significant majority of people who talked about Obama in messianic terms.

But I do wonder about this: "We were quite surprised by the result that 49 percent of those frequently attending worship services believed that Trump was anointed by God to be president."

As usual, the actual question asked in the poll is not revealed to us, we're only told the interpretation of the results, which should raise red flags. For instance, I would agree that Trump was anointed by God, but only in the sense that every political leader is anointed by God, as the Bible tells us in Romans 13:1, "Let every person be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those that exist have been instituted by God."

Does this mean that I think that Donald Trump was specifically handpicked by God to be our president at this time? Of course not, and I suspect most other Christians don't believe it, either.

Also, I wonder how many Christians just thought that Trump was anointed by God simply because they believe God is control of all things. Trump being picked as the leader of the US is in God's plan just like Xi being picked to be the leader of China is in God's plan. I wonder how many Christians interpreted that question like that? If I was asked that question, that's how I would have interpreted it. Maybe some Christians even clarified that as their position, but the pollsters interpreted it as being a "yes?"

[oxmixmudd]

Also, I wonder how many Christians just thought that Trump was anointed by God simply because they believe God is control of all things. Trump being picked as the leader of the US is in God's plan just like Xi being picked to be the leader of China is in God's plan. I wonder how many Christians interpreted that question like that? If I was asked that question, that's how I would have interpreted it. Maybe some Christians even clarified that as their position, but the pollsters interpreted it as being a "yes?"

Why would this be magnified to the point it's in the news of it was "'ho hum normal' - we believe EVERY leader is annointed by God"? That just isn't even close to reality here. 'normal' is "pray for you leaders", more along the lines of "even if you don't like them very much". This is "Trump is God's annointed" - which has both kingly Messianic connotations and which NO christian I know of says about anyone unless they are very, very special people, usually very spiritual, with special gifts of ministry. Trying to pass this off as insignificant and no big deal is just really dishonest - it is NOT normal to refer to any leader in those terms in the Church - let alone a political,secular leader.

[Thoughtful Monk]

Also, I wonder how many Christians just thought that Trump was anointed by God simply because they believe God is control of all things. Trump being picked as the leader of the US is in God's plan just like Xi being picked to be the leader of China is in God's plan. I wonder how many Christians interpreted that question like that? If I was asked that question, that's how I would have interpreted it. Maybe some Christians even clarified that as their position, but the pollsters interpreted it as being a "yes?"

I looked at the blog mentioned in the OP and I didn't see any list of what the questions were. Having done enough surveys, I know how the question is asked can make a difference to the answer. So I agree with the various posters who are wonder what the survey questions are and were they strict yes/no or are their comments to be interpreted.

[oxmixmudd]

I looked at the blog mentioned in the OP and I didn't see any list of what the questions were. Having done enough surveys, I know how the question is asked can make a difference to the answer. So I agree with the various posters who are wonder what the survey questions are and were they strict yes/no or are their comments to be interpreted.

It would seem to me that unless the term 'God's anointed' was never used in the associated survey, that would be a red herring. "God's annointed" is not some random term with no intrinsic meaning of it's own that could create confusion or elicit ambiguity in the survey taker. For 49% of regular church goers to be willing to ascribe that specific term to any individual person, especially a political leader, is significant regardless of how the question was asked. but perhaps you can think of an example of how such a question could be worded that used that term but which could have pulled a positive response out of people with ambivalent ho hum this is normal opinions about God's 'anointing' on Donald Trump?

I still think this entire line of denial is just a kid with his hand in the cookie jar saying 'what cookie?'

[Mountain Man]

Why would this be magnified to the point it's in the news of it was "'ho hum normal' - we believe EVERY leader is annointed by God"? That just isn't even close to reality here. 'normal' is "pray for you leaders", more along the lines of "even if you don't like them very much". This is "Trump is God's annointed" - which has both kingly Messianic connotations and which NO christian I know of says about anyone unless they are very, very special people, usually very spiritual, with special gifts of ministry. Trying to pass this off as insignificant and no big deal is just really dishonest - it is NOT normal to refer to any leader in those terms in the Church - let alone a political,secular leader.

You're basing all of this on a survey that we know nothing about. Who exactly was surveyed? What was the actual question? What answers were the respondents allowed to give? Was there any room for nuance and explanation in the answers? How much interpretation is there in the conclusion?

As I said, if it was a straight "yes/no" sort of question then I would be inclined to answer yes, not because I believe that Trump is a paragon of spiritual virtue but simply because I take the Bible at its word when it says that all authority is established by God.

Also, your insistence that "anointing" can only refer to kings and messiahs is not accurate. The Bible also uses the term to refer to ordinary believers. 1 John 2:27 is just one example:

"But the anointing that you received from him abides in you, and you have no need that anyone should teach you. But as his anointing teaches you about everything, and is true, and is no lie—just as it has taught you, abide in him."

https://carm.org/sermon-1-john-227-you-are-anointed-god

[NorrinRadd]

It would seem to me that unless the term 'God's anointed' was never used in the associated survey, that would be a red herring. "God's annointed" is not some random term with no intrinsic meaning of it's own that could create confusion or elicit ambiguity in the survey taker. For 49% of regular church goers to be willing to ascribe that specific term to any individual person, especially a political leader, is significant regardless of how the question was asked. but perhaps you can think of an example of how such a question could be worded that used that term but which could have pulled a positive response out of people with ambivalent ho hum this is normal opinions about God's 'anointing' on Donald Trump?

I still think this entire line of denial is just a kid with his hand in the cookie jar saying 'what cookie?'

"Anointing" is a common term in Pentecostal and Charismatic circles. I'm more familiar with those groups than with other branches of Christianity. For us, saying someone is "anointed by God" is NOT close to saying that person is "the Anointed One." For one thing, passages like 2 Cor. 1:21 and 1 John 2:20, 27 show that all believers are "anointed." Beyond that, many in my culture tend to use "anointing" as virtually synonymous with "gifting" or "calling." (I don't commonly use the term that way.) So people in my culture can look at Trump as someone chosen and equipped by God to fulfill certain purposes, without viewing him as a religious leader or moral example.

Having said that, and speaking as a Trump supporter, I am NOT comfortable with some of the fawning and adulation directed his way.

[oxmixmudd]

"Anointing" is a common term in Pentecostal and Charismatic circles. I'm more familiar with those groups than with other branches of Christianity. For us, saying someone is "anointed by God" is NOT close to saying that person is "the Anointed One."

You are correct. I am likely as familiar with those circles as you are. And while yes being called an 'annointed one' in those circles does not mean one is messiah, it most certainly does confer a special selection by God, and special dispensation of His Grace or gifting.

For one thing, passages like 2 Cor. 1:21 and 1 John 2:20, 27 show that all believers are "anointed." Beyond that, many in my culture tend to use "anointing" as virtually synonymous with "gifting" or "calling." (I don't commonly use the term that way.) So people in my culture can look at Trump as someone chosen and equipped by God to fulfill certain purposes, without viewing him as a religious leader or moral example.

No - it's not the same as 'gifting' or 'calling'. It's a step above that. And, more to the point, it's not the same as what Romans 13 is talking about. It's something special, something unique, something above average. And I certainly have never run across people in the Charismatic/Pentecostal circles I've had the pleasure of interacting with that would lightly confer that term on anyone, let alone (prior to Trump) a political leader with the immoral credentials Trump hails from. This is a VERY unique situation, which is my point. At least as significant as the Obamessiah rhetoric, but scarier (to me at least) in that it is IN the church, not outside it.

Having said that, and speaking as a Trump supporter, I am NOT comfortable with some of the fawning and adulation directed his way.

On that we agree

[NorrinRadd]

I'm pretty certain that "back in the day" I heard Jimmy Swaggart say that Jerry Lee Lewis had an anointing for music, and I heard others say the same about Elvis Presley. (In both cases, the sense was that God had gifted them, and they ended up not always using those gifts to their best purposes.)

[Mountain Man]

No - it's not the same as 'gifting' or 'calling'.

Perhaps not as you use the term, but is that how everybody uses it? More importantly, is that how the people who responded to the survey used it? You have not proven this to be the case, so your weeping and gnashing of teeth is over nothing.

[oxmixmudd]

I'm pretty certain that "back in the day" I heard Jimmy Swaggart say that Jerry Lee Lewis had an anointing for music, and I heard others say the same about Elvis Presley. (In both cases, the sense was that God had gifted them, and they ended up not always using those gifts to their best purposes.)

I think you are right now that you mention it. Through I will tell you that in the Charismatic circles I was in at the time, it was a subject of concern that he would have done that - that it was not an appropriate use of the term. Someone might be gifted in an area, yes. But anointed by God, no - that is something else. But it is interesting our differing experience in this arena, it likely does color our different responses to it being applied to Trump.