Rso,
“ The question is itself the answer”. The point here wasn’t that there isn’t an answer as I said before. The point was that u can’t always take a Halacha at face value, sometimes iyun shows u the thing has a different meaning than you thought. It says bar kochba was king for 3 years what did that look like? He didn’t do all the laws of kings. He wasn’t a reish galusa either. So what’s the definition we are working with? If you don’t know the definition then this leads us to number 2:
2. “ The Lubavicher, on the other hand, does not, and did not, fit ANY of the criteria.” If you don’t know what king means here in rambam then how do u know he doesn’t fit it? As I’ve already said numerous times. We know and can trace the rebbes lineage to the alter rebbe. The rebbe rashab already said all the chabad rebbes were from zera dovid. We know the alter rebbe traces to the maharal and we know the maharal goes to dovid. You can keep denying this but we have the family history supporting this. I have documentation tracing me to vilna in the 1700’s and u think someone with the background the rebbe had wouldn’t have more support for his lineage?? Ur response is just to pretend nobody has any documentation of anybody? If so then nobody can ever be moshiach because they can never prove it.
3. “ They want him to be Mashiach so they will distort and (mis)interpret any and all facts and statements of Rishonim and Chazal to allow for this premise.” Besuros tovos! I can make you feel better then. Lubavitch is not interpreting the Rambam in a way to make their rebbe moshiach in terms of the criteria. The yachuf does not start with physical force but Noam and shalom is something the LUBAVITCHER REBBE SAID. That Moshiach needs shluchim is something the LUBAVITCHER REBBE SAID, that shluchim telling people they need to keep mitzvos and this would bring about yachuf in its simplest since is something again the REBBE SAID. That many milchamos of Moshiach are now being fought with peacefully is again something the REBBE said. This has very little to do with our chiddushim. The only chiddush we need to make is on its continuation(as obviously he is not here to give an account of continuation). The rebbe was the one who explained what the criteria are and how they work. So this whole story u have concocted just isn’t the case. We say what we say because our gadol said it. It’s easy to take a bias about a group and make up baloney and try to psychoanalyze and explain away why we are saying the thing we are saying so that u need not deal with them more seriously but the fact is u are UNDERemphasizing how much we rely on and use what the rebbe said for the cases we make. As David Berger said in his 2014 tablet article there are statements from the Lubavitcher rebbe which a skeptic wouldn’t dream would exist that do. Obviously if u want to understand a movement u need to understand the their rebbe first. Delve into what he said and did and then study the groups response to those things. Not the other way around and not without looking at what he said and his arguments for what he said.