- This topic has 25,959 replies, 116 voices, and was last updated 1 week ago by
.
- Posts
Carmel………Read the part of your own post I posted back to you . As I said, all the rest is pure garbage. Anyone with any common sense knows what Jesus meet when he said ……> “I am the root and “OFFSPRING” “OF” or (from) David”> only an idiot can’t figure that out, it doesn’t take some “mysterious religious” BS, like you give us to understand it.
Like I said, you either believe what God the Father said, and Jesus or not, in you case you don’t believe either of them. You have to change nearly all our scriptures to fit your Satanic influenced deceptions doctrines.
Repent and start over Carmel.
peace and love to you and yours………gene
Gene
It is you who must repent of using such language towards Carmel…
And then what spiritual pride you manifest…
You disgust me Gene….frankly you are not worthy of being called a Christian….You must apologize to Carmel for being so contemptuous…🙏
I did read what you wrote in the original post; I wasn’t going to spend the time commenting on your experience in your youth with the WWCG or derivative. What was given to Moses was for the Jews and not for the rest of the world. Your personal study experiences and what you found are very similar to mine and didn’t feel any commentary was required. Concerning the last part, I personally don’t see any “mainstream christian” rejecting Jesus as the Messiah, let alone saying the NT is contradictory. Not exactly sure what you are looking for.
I will stand behind my statement, “It’s past time to verify what the NT says and ask if it aligns with the OT.”; if they align, fantastic; if they don’t, there’s a problem. The statement isn’t meant to say you haven’t read them or treat them as lesser books. The statement is to read them with an “alignment” mindset; is the teaching of the NT confirmed by the OT. That said, your typical “mainstream christian” doesn’t read, let alone study, anything to the left of the book of Matthew; and if we are being honest, doesn’t pick the bible up except once a week when they darken the door to a church building and get their church attendance star.
Align NT teachings with the following passages: Isa 2:2-4; Micah 4:1-4; Zech 8:20-23; Zech 9:9-10 (christian’s love verse 9, but ignore verse10); Zech 14:16. In these passages it’s speaking of the nations (those who are “non-Jewish”, “non-Hebrew”, non descendants of Israel/Jacob) and what they will do at the “end of the days.” Is there anything within these passages that is confirmed in the NT? I didn’t read anything about believing in the Messiah for salvation; but did read the nations were going to “stream” to God’s mountain to worship.
@Gene,
You: FIRST OF ALL, Jesus was not talking about the “law” in the sense PAUL was, and you misquoted what he was saying, Jesus said……”for “All” the prophets and the Law “prophesied “UNTIL” John”. Jesus was talking about what was written in the, “BOOKS”, of the law and the prophets. HE was not talking about the law in relationship to the “Ten Commandments” , as you falsely assume he was. Jesus fulfilled all that was written about him in the books of the law and prophets, that is what he was talking about only.
It is Jesus who stated in Matt 5:17-20 that he didn’t come to abolish but to fulfill the law and the prophets. He then continues by stating heaven and earth will pass away before the tiniest letter or stroke of the law does. He sums it up by saying anyone who abolishes the smallest commandment and teaches other to do the same will called least in God’s kingdom. What “commandment” is Jesus referring to if not one of the 613 commands given by God to Moses?
The first five books are the “law” (I prefer “instructions”) as the Hebrew Bible is broken into three parts: Torah (Pentateuch [law]), Nevi’im (Prophets), and Ketuvim (Writings) aka. TaNaK. So when Jesus is speaking of the law and the prophets, these are the two parts he is speaking of. He specifically states commandments; and these commandments would be the 613 commands given by God to Moses contained within the books of the “law”; within the 613 commands are the “10 commandments” that have been separated out and are treated as being separate from the 613 commands. Even Jesus recognizes the importance of following the “law” and Paul says nope; for Paul the law was only there to point out “sin.”
Let’s not forget about Rom 10:4 where Paul states “Christ is the end of the law”; is Paul stating Jesus is the end of the Torah and therefore nullifying the commands given by God to Moses? Hmmmm!
You: you brought up several points in you post to Jodi, each point needs to be addressed individually.
Me: you only addressed one; have more questions?
@Gene
You guys have been going back and forth AND getting quite nasty with each other…so Christ like. Remove your closing statement, because there is nothing peaceful or loving in your replies.
Answer me, how can Jesus be the “root” of Jesse/David/Solomon when both Matthew and Luke claim Jesus was conceived of the spirit? In order for Jesus to be a descendant of David, his father would have be a direct descendant of David; yet, he was conceived of the spirit. Honestly, this should give you your first clue that Jesus isn’t the Messiah.
Desire Truth…….Jesus was the “end” of what the law, was driving at, or why the law was given in the first place. to be more clear, it is not saying Jesus put a end to the law and commandments as you suppose it does, but he fulfilled the intent of the Law.
Jesus fulfilled all the requirements of the book of the law and commandments. But he didn’t do it by the way “LAW” ( forced compliance) WORKS, that was Paul’s point. He fulfilled them through the working of the “HOLY SPIRIT”, which he received after he was baptized at the Jordan river, just as scripture shows us. We must also do it “exactly” as Jesus did, or we simply won’t be in the Kingdom, Just as he said, …..> “whosoever overcomes, I will grant to sit with me, in my kingdom, “EVEN AS I HAVE” also overcome, and am sit down in my Fathers Kingdom.” The same requirement is given to us, we must overcome exactly the same way Jesus had to, by the same effectual working of God the Fathers Holy Spirit, working in us as it did in Jesus.As far as me being hard on Carmel goes, I “hate”, the “teachings” of Carmel , and even the teaching of some others here, but please understand, I do not hate Carmel, nor anyone here, that is why I alway try to end my posts with , “peace and love to you and yours…..gene”. Even Jesus “hated” some of the teachings of some, and Even called Peter Satan, but he didn’t say he hated them did he?
peace and love to you and yours Desire Truth……….gene
Berean……read what I posted to DT, above, I do not “hate” anyone here or anywhere else , but I do hate some of their teachings, but never them. Remember the words of Jesus, “have salt in yourselves, but have peace also”.
peace and love to you and yours Berean………gene
Gene
Gene
You wrote this to Carmel
“only an idiot can’t figure that out, it doesn’t take some “mysterious religious” BS, like you give us to understand it.”
This is not contempt, what is it then?
HI Desire truth
You: Answer me, how can Jesus be the “root” of Jesse/David/Solomon when both Matthew and Luke claim Jesus was conceived of the spirit?
Me: Genesis 18:11 Now they were both old, and far advanced in years,
and it had ceased to be with Sara after the manner of women.
Answer please, HOW CAN ISAAC BE THE SON OF ABRAHAM, WHEN ABRAHAM AND SARAH NEVER HAD SEX?
Peace and love in Jesus Christ
@Gene,
You: he fulfilled the intent of the Law.
Me: What is/was the intent of the Law? Explain.
You: Jesus fulfilled all the requirements of the book of the law and commandments. But he didn’t do it by the way “LAW” ( forced compliance) WORKS
Me: Your “forced compliance”, the “law is burdensome”, the “law is a curse”, the “law is for sinners” understanding is christian dogma; to parrot any of these claims is to spit in the face of God, because these commands came from HIM. Are you saying HE had know idea what HE is doing? These commands are instructions/guides on how one is to serve God and how to live and treat those around us; Jesus even summarized that in Mark 12 (“love God, love others”). When raising a child, aren’t they given “instructions” on how they are to live and interact with those around them? Don’t we as parents teach our children positive actions result in a favorable response, while negative actions result in unfavorable responses. This is exactly what God has done for mankind and examples of the positive and negative are written all over the OT; HE’s given us the manual for life, but we don’t look at it.
You then mention how Jesus received and was filled with the Holy Spirit at his baptism and was only able to fulfill the laws because of this “filling.” Let’s fast forward to today and ask yourself are you sinless? Most christians will say they are filled with the spirit; yet, are their lives proof of this; are they living a “sinless” life? After all, Jesus was filled with spirit and didn’t sin and we are to live “exactly” as he did; why is there still sin running rampant in the world? Why are there over 30,000 different religions worldwide? Why are we not unified in the name Jesus; don’t we all have the same spirit? I guess the kingdom is going to be kind of empty. Oh wait, we have grace…thanks Paul, fixed it!
Who or what is the “Holy Spirit”; is it God; a characteristic of God; something separate from God; the same as god, but in a different “form”? I did a search on the “holy spirit” in the OT and it appeared three times and each time “holy” is an adjective describing the Spirit; and as we should all know, God is spirit. So the OT is really saying God is holy. Jumping to the NT, “Holy Spirit” is personified and is mentioned 92 times. Is the holy Spirit a description of God or is it separate operating on its own?
You: “HI Desire truth
You: Answer me, how can Jesus be the “root” of Jesse/David/Solomon when both Matthew and Luke claim Jesus was conceived of the spirit?
Me: Genesis 18:11 Now they were both old, and far advanced in years, and it had ceased to be with Sara after the manner of women.
Answer please, HOW CAN ISAAC BE THE SON OF ABRAHAM, WHEN ABRAHAM AND SARAH NEVER HAD SEX?”
ME: Best go read Gen 18:11 again, this time read it for comprehension and understanding. You claim Abraham didn’t have sex with his wife; sooooooo, Isaac is also an “immaculately conceived.” Is this a joke!!! Do you seriously believe what you wrote?!?! Put down your corrupt King James and pick up another translation (which I didn’t have to do) and you will discover this passage isn’t talking about sex; it’s talking about the monthly cycle women go through, also known as menstruation – the “manner of women” – she was past this and was barren. God “opened” her womb so she could get pregnant; besides didn’t Abraham sleep with Sarah’s maiden and get her pregnant to have a son. Are you saying Sarah’s slaves were the only women that peaked Abraham’s interests?!?
Let’s move forward to chapter 20 of Genesis; Abimelech, thought Sarah was a hotty at 89 years and took her to be his. Maybe what you need to do is spend a little more time in the relevant OT and less time spiritualizing the NT.I do thank you for the good laugh! Also, why are you looking at the obsolete portion of the Bible?
Hi DT,
You: ME: Best go read Gen 18:11 again, this time read it for comprehension and understanding. You claim Abraham didn’t have sex with his wife; sooooooo, Isaac is also an “immaculately conceived.” Is this a joke!!!
IT IS EVIDENTLY CLEAR THAT WHATEVER DOESN’T PLEASE YOU ESPECIALLY WHEN IT REVEALS YOUR SPIRITUAL WEAKNESS, YOU SIMPLY CALL IT A JOKE! DESPITE THE FACT THAT GOD IS AT WORK!
JUST BE AWARE ALSO:
ABEL WAS NEVER BORN OF EVE AT ALL THROUGH SEX, BUT THROUGH GOD’S INTERVENTION! LIKE ISAAC AND JESUS!
JUST TO CHEW A BIT MOORE!
THREE DIVINE CONCEPTIONS!
ONE ASSOCIATED TO THE SPIRIT,
ONE ASSOCIATED TO THE SOUL, and
ONE ASSOCIATED TO THE FLESH!
JESUS’ TRIUNE SPIRIT!
THE BEGINNING OF ALL GOD’S BEGINNINGS
Do you seriously believe what you wrote?!?!
Me. I am more than convinced that SATAN MADE ABRAHAM IMPOTENT IMMEDIATELY AFTER HAVING SEX WITH THE SATANIC MAID, THE
NOT ONLY THAT, BUT GOD AFTER GIVING ABRAHAM HIS SON, RESTORED ABRAHAM FERTILITY AGAIN.
ALSO ISAAC WAS THE PRODUCT OF THE HOLY GHOST JESUS, THE SON OF GOD,
THE BEGINNING OF THE ETERNAL COVENANT. SPIRITUAL.
AS MUCH AS JACOB WAS THE PRODUCT OF “THE WORD” JESUS, THE SON OF MAN.
THE TRUE ISRAEL!
THE BEGINNING OF ISRAEL THE CHOSEN PEOPLE OF GOD. PHYSICAL!
ENJOY THE TRUTH PLEASE!
THE TORAH.COM
Isaac’s Divine Conception?
“The Lord visited Sarah” (Genesis 21:1) – When God (and his angels) appears to Abraham to announce the birth of Isaac, the text implies a hidden visit to Sarah. Does this mean, as both Philo and Paul claim, that Isaac was born from a divine conception?
Dr. Rabbi
Samuel Z. Glaser
Abraham, Sarah and the three Angels. Marc Chagall 1966. Wikiart
Why God and the Two Men / Angels Inquire about Sarah
After Abraham circumcises his household and himself, YHWH appears to him while he is sitting in his tent.[1] As the story unfolds, Abraham sees three “men” standing near him. According to the straightforward reading of the text, it is YHWH plus two angels.[2] After they eat, they inquire about the absent Sarah:
בראשית יח:טוַיֹּאמְר֣וּ אֵׄלָׄ֔יׄוׄ אַיֵּ֖ה שָׂרָ֣ה אִשְׁתֶּ֑ךָ וַיֹּ֖אמֶר הִנֵּ֥ה בָאֹֽהֶל׃
Gen 18:9 They said to him, “Where is your wife Sarah?” And he replied, “There, in the tent.”
Oddly, even though this verse suggests that the men are looking for her, the story simply continues with the men speaking to Abraham:
יח:יוַיֹּאמֶר שׁ֣וֹב אָשׁ֤וּב אֵלֶ֙יךָ֙ כָּעֵ֣ת חַיָּ֔ה וְהִנֵּה־בֵ֖ן לְשָׂרָ֣ה אִשְׁתֶּ֑ךָ וְשָׂרָ֥ה שֹׁמַ֛עַת פֶּ֥תַח הָאֹ֖הֶל וְה֥וּא אַחֲרָֽיו:
18:10 And he said, “I will return to you at the due season, and your wife Sarah shall have a son!” Sarah was listening at the entrance of the tent, which was behind him.
Highlighting Sarah’s Modesty
The rabbis notice this problem, and offer some homiletical suggestions (b. Bava Metzia 87a):
ויאמרו אליו איה שרה אשתך ויאמר הנה באהל – להודיע ששרה אמנו צנועה היתה. אמר רב יהודה אמר רב, ואיתימא רבי יצחק: יודעים היו מלאכי השרת ששרה אמנו באהל היתה, אלא מאי באהל – כדי לחבבה על בעלה
“They said to him, “Where is your wife Sarah?” And he replied, “There, in the tent” – this comes to teach that our mother Sarah was modest. Rav Yehudah said in the name of Rav—and some say Rabbi Yitzhak—“The ministering angels knew that our mother, Sarah, was in the tent. So what was [the question leading to Abraham’s response] ‘in the tent’ for? In order to make her beloved to her husband.”
According to this answer, the angels were just trying to get Abraham to notice how modest Sarah was by calling his attention to the fact that she wasn’t there.
To Give Sarah “a Cup of Blessing”
The Talmud records yet another answer:
רבי יוסי ברבי חנינא אמר: כדי לשגר לה כוס של ברכה
Rabbi Yossi b’Rabbi Chanina said: “To be able to pass her the cup of blessing.”
This interpretation suggests that the angels sent Sarah back the cup of wine that was blessed during the meal, a rabbinic custom familiar from the Talmud.
Although neither of these answers fit with the simple meaning of the text, they highlight the lacuna. Having asked where Sarah is, why does the story change course and simply continue with the visitors’ conversation with Abraham?
Did Someone Go in the Tent?
In the MT of v. 9, the word אליו has dots called punctia extraordinaria, which, according to the rabbis, communicate some sort of hesitation about the whether the word(s) or letter(s) really belong in the biblical text.[3] Genesis Rabbah (48:9, Theodor-Albeck) interprets:
[ויאמרו אליו איה שרה אשתך] איו נקוד ל’ אינו נקוד,
“And they said to him: ‘Where is your wife Sarah’” (Gen 18:9) – The letters aleph, yod, vav have dots, the lamed has no dots.[4]
…אמר ר’ עזריה כשם שאמרו לאברהם איה שרה כך אמרו לשרה איו אברהם.
…R. Azariah says: “Just as they said to Abraham ‘where is she (איה),’ thus they said to Sarah ‘where is he’ [5](איו).”
R. Azariah here assumes that the dots communicate a missing scene, namely that the angels entered the tent and spoke with Sarah directly. The change of verb tense from the plural “they said” (וַיֹּאמְרוּ) in verse 9 to the singular “he said” (וַיֹּאמֶר) in v. 10 implies a change of scene.[6] In the first scene, all three angels are speaking with Abraham, and the next scene, only one announces Sarah’s pregnancy and the future birth of Isaac. In between these two speeches, the angels entered the tent to be with Sarah.
Why does the text imply a scene with Sarah secluded with angels? Is it possible that this visit was not merely to announce that Sarah would become pregnant but is also explaining how Sarah, a menopausal woman, becomes miraculously pregnant?
וה’ פקד את שרה: And YHWH Pakad-ed Sarah
Support for this possibility comes from the description of Isaac’s birth:
בראשית כא:אוַי-הוָה פָּקַד אֶת שָׂרָה כַּאֲשֶׁר אָמָר וַיַּעַשׂ יְ-הוָה לְשָׂרָה כַּאֲשֶׁר דִּבֵּר.
Gen 21:1 YHWH visited Sarah as He had promised, and YHWH did for Sarah as He had spoken.
The verse is written with poetic parallelism. YHWH “pakad”s Sarah and he does what he promised. The root פ.ק.ד has a broad semantic range in the Bible. In this context, it can mean “remember,” “take care of,” or “visit.”[7] The idea that God visited Sarah goes together with the verb “to do” (ע.ש.ה) which is used in the parallel hemistich.
When did this visit take place? Ramban (1194-1270) suggests that it must have occurred some time between the visit in chapter 18 when Sarah’s pregnancy was announced and when Sarah gave birth in ch. 21, since in that passage, God promises to return; otherwise the promise of a future visit is never fulfilled:
…הקב״ה אמר לו בכאן למועד אשוב אליך ובין במלאך או בהקב״ה לא מצינו ששב אליו למועדו אולי נכלל בלשון וי״י פקד את שרה כאשר אמר…
…The Holy One, blessed be He, said here (Gen 18:14) “I will return to you at the time,” and whether this refers to an angel or God, we do not find that he ever returned at some time. Perhaps, this is referred to in the words (Gen 21:1): “God visited Sarah as he had promised…”[8]
Nevertheless, Gen 21:1 could also be referring to the very visit recorded in ch. 18 (both texts are attributed to J in source critical scholarship). According to this, the verse is telling us that when YHWH visited Sarah, he caused her to conceive. YHWH further communicates this fact when he promises that when he returns in the future, Sarah would already be with child (Gen 18:14). In other words, the verse affirms what God did for Sarah then, i.e., that he caused her to become pregnant during that visit.
Either way, the cryptic allusion to God’s visit to Sarah implies that contact with, or proximity to, the divine was necessary for her to conceive. This need not be understood as something sexual in the style of a god seducing a human woman like we find in Greek myths. In fact, nothing in the Isaac story implies lust on the part of the divine being, but only grace towards an elderly barren woman, married to one of YHWH’s faithful worshipper’s.
Divine Conceptions
The birth of Isaac is not the only place in the Bible in which a divine or angelic conception is implied.
When Eve names Cain (Gen 4:1), she explains his name by saying “I have created a man with YHWH”[9] (קָנִיתִי אִישׁ אֶת יְ-הוָה).
The children of God (בני אלוהים) are said to have propagated with women and produced giants (Gen 6:1-4).
The Second Temple works, 1 Enoch (106) and Genesis Apocryphon (col. 2) both describe how Noah’s father, Lamech, was worried that Noah was the product of a divine being and not his own son.
Samson seems to be the product of a union between Manoach’s wife and a visiting angel.[10]
Unlike the children of God account, nothing carnal is implied in the Isaac story, only that Sarah needed to be in physical proximity to the deity in order for the miraculous conception to take effect.Philo’s “Mystery of Isaac”
Philo of Alexandria (ca. 20 BCE-50CE), the most influential Jewish Hellenistic philosopher, explicitly read the account of Isaac’s birth as referring to divine conception. He believed that an important philosophical “mystery” inhered in the story of Isaac’s birth.[11] Isaac represents joy (his name means “laughter”), because he is one with the power behind the universe. This is because Isaac is actually God’s son and not Abraham’s:
[W]hen happiness, that is Isaac, was born, she says, in the pious exaltation, “The Lord has caused me laughter, and whoever shall hear of it shall rejoice with Me.” Open your ears, therefore, O ye initiated, and receive the most sacred mysteries. Laughter is joy; and the expression, “has caused,” is equivalent to “has begotten.” So that what is here said has some such meaning as this, “The Lord has begotten Isaac.” (Allegorical Laws, 3:219, Yonge trans.)
And I will bring forward as a competent witness in proof of what I have said, the most holy Moses. For he introduces Sarah as conceiving a son when God beheld her by himself; but he represents her as bringing forth her son, not to him who beheld her then, but to him who was eager to attain to wisdom, and his name is called Abraham. (On the Cherubs, 45, Yonge trans.)
In one passage (On the Change of Names, 131), Philo even calls Isaac “God’s son” (υἱὸς θεοῦ). Howard Schwartz, a scholar of Bible and Jewish thought, explains Philo’s exegesis:
How does Philo arrive at this explanation? He interprets Sarah’s comment that “God has caused me laughter” (Gen. 21:6) to mean that the Lord has begotten Isaac. He interprets “has caused” to mean “begotten,” and he substitutes Isaac for “laughter,” since “Isaac” means “laughter,” referring to Sarah’s laughter in Genesis 18:12, when the angel said that she would have a child even though Sarah was 90 years old.[12]
Although Philo is more interested in the philosophical implications of this divine conception, he is basing it on a reading of the text similar to the one suggested above.[13]
From Philo to Paul
Paul of Tarsus (c. 5-67 C.E.) appears to have shared this idea. His letter to the Galatians states:
4:22 …It is written that Abraham had two sons, one by a slave woman and the other by a free woman. 4:23 One, the child of the slave, was born according to the flesh; the other, the child of the free woman, was born through the promise.
In explaining Paul’s exegesis, Daniel Boyarin writes:
It should be noted that in the biblical text, it is not stated that Abraham “knew Sarah his wife” after the “annunciation.” There may have even been, then, a tradition that the conception of Isaac was entirely by means of the promise… The point would be that Hagar had sex with a man in order to conceive, but Sarah did not![14]
Paul was likely influenced by Philo’s thinking here, whether directly (Philo was an older contemporary of Paul) or because Philo’s allegories were “in the air” among Hellenistic Jews reading the Pentateuch.[15]
Purging Divine Conception from Judaism
Ironically, Paul’s adoption of Philo’s reading, and his application of the concept to Jesus, likely sealed its fate among Jewish interpreters. The New Testament traditions of Jesus’ birth through the holy spirit (Math 1:18, Luke, 1:35) rendered any such idea anathema, even as applied to Isaac and even without the connotations of divinity familiar from Christian theology. Jewish tradition thus permanently rejected Philo’s “mystery of Isaac,” nevertheless, certain clues in the text point to the possibility that Philo was reading the Torah correctly all along.
You: I do thank you for the good laugh! Also, why are you looking at the obsolete portion of the Bible?
JESUS FULFILLED THE OT ONCE AND FOR ALL!
OBSOLETE FOR HUMANITY AND THEIR SALVATION!
THE OT WAS ONLY FOR THE ISRAELITE, NOT FOR THE ENTIRE HUMAN RACE!
SIMPLY IN ORDER FOR JESUS TO ERADICATE SATAN AND GIVE HUMANITY REDEMPTION FROM THE CARNAL PROCESS OF THE LAW OF THE OT.
Peace and love in Jesus Christ
Hi Desire Truth,
YOU: You must remember, up until a few months ago we were basically on the same page in what we believed.
ME: Were we really though? I’d really like to know what all you think we were basically on the same page about?
You to a post to Gene or Carmel said, “Answer me, how can Jesus be the “root” of Jesse/David/Solomon when both Matthew and Luke claim Jesus was conceived of the spirit? In order for Jesus to be a descendant of David, his father would have be a direct descendant of David; yet, he was conceived of the spirit. Honestly, this should give you your first clue that Jesus isn’t the Messiah.”
ME: Is this an example of what you previously believed and then assume I do, because I 100% don’t.
Isaiah 7 speaks of a virgin birth for the purpose of a sign regarding a king over David’s throne. Most Christians completely ignore this fact and turn the virgin birth of Jesus into falsehood.
Matthew 1 is literally giving us the genesis of Jesus Christ according to his genetic lineage telling us that he is biologically the son of David and of Abraham through Joseph. Joseph and Mary by all means would have conceived Jesus the usual way but God had promised a sign of a virgin birth. God fulfilled that sign by the powers of His Spirit, exactly why we are told Mary conceived by the Holy Spirit. How else would she have been able to conceive as a virgin, they didn’t have artificial insemination back then, lol.
Desire Truth…….You mixing up “commandment”, with “LAW” (forced compliance) , they’re not the same thing.
What I meet by the “intent” of the law, was what the whole law was driving at in the first place. Jesus fulfilled not only that ‘intent”, of the law, but also all what was written about him in the books , of the law and the prophets.
Hope that clarifies it for you.
Paul on the other hand was dealing with how “law works” , and why and who it was made for, the ungodly, and evil people, just as our laws today are made for.
The Israelites we’re unfaithful and lawless people, always rebelling against the commandments of God, so he shocked them with fear, and turned his, “loving commandments” into laws (forced obedience), because of their evil ways. Ex 20:20…> read it for yourself.
peace and love to you and yours ………..gene
Hi Desire Truth,
YOU: Align NT teachings with the following passages: Isa 2:2-4; Micah 4:1-4; Zech 8:20-23; Zech 9:9-10 (christian’s love verse 9, but ignore verse10); Zech 14:16. In these passages it’s speaking of the nations (those who are “non-Jewish”, “non-Hebrew”, non descendants of Israel/Jacob) and what they will do at the “end of the days.” Is there anything within these passages that is confirmed in the NT? I didn’t read anything about believing in the Messiah for salvation; but did read the nations were going to “stream” to God’s mountain to worship.
ME:
Isaiah 2:2 And it shall come to pass in the last days, that the mountain of the LORD’S house shall be established in the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it. 3 And many people shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem. 4 And he shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people: and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.
Isaiah 42:1 Behold my servant, whom I uphold; mine elect, in whom my soul delighteth; I have put my Spirit upon him: he shall bring forth judgment to the Gentiles. 2 He shall not cry, nor lift up, nor cause his voice to be heard in the street. 3 A bruised reed shall he not break, and the smoking flax shall he not quench: he shall bring forth judgment unto truth. 4 He shall not fail nor be discouraged, till he have set judgment in the earth: and the isles shall wait for his law.
Is not chapter 42 speaking of the Messiah?
Will the Gentiles need to believe in him in the last days? Will they need to believe that God’s Spirit is upon him and that he has been chosen to be their judge and give them direction and instruction?
Isaiah 49:6 And he said, It is a light thing that thou shouldest be my servant to raise up the tribes of Jacob, and to restore the preserved of Israel: I will also give thee for a light to the Gentiles, that thou mayest be my salvation unto the end of the earth.
What does God mean that he would be His salvation unto the end of the earth?
7 Thus saith the LORD, the Redeemer of Israel, and his Holy One, to him whom man despiseth, to him whom the nation abhorreth, to a servant of rulers, Kings shall see and arise, princes also shall worship, because of the LORD that is faithful, and the Holy One of Israel, and he shall choose thee. 8 Thus saith the LORD, In an acceptable time have I heard thee, and in a day of salvation have I helped thee: and I will preserve thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, to establish the earth, to cause to inherit the desolate heritages; 9 That thou mayest say to the prisoners, Go forth; to them that are in darkness, Shew yourselves. They shall feed in the ways, and their pastures shall be in all high places.
What does God mean that He would give him for a covenant?
This is also spoken of in Isaiah 42,
6 I the LORD have called thee in righteousness, and will hold thine hand, and will keep thee, and give thee for a covenant of the people, for a light of the Gentiles; 7 To open the blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the prison, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison house. 8 I am the LORD: that is my name: and my glory will I not give to another, neither my praise to graven images.
I ask again, what does God mean that he will give him for a covenant and how does he give salvation?
Zec 12:10 And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.
Isaiah 44:21 Remember these, O Jacob and Israel; for thou art my servant: I have formed thee; thou art my servant: O Israel, thou shalt not be forgotten of me. 22 I have blotted out, as a thick cloud, thy transgressions, and, as a cloud, thy sins: return unto me; for I have redeemed thee.
Isaiah 53:4 Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows: yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. 5 But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities: the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.
8 He was taken from prison and from judgment: and who shall declare his generation? for he was cut off out of the land of the living: for the transgression of my people was he stricken.
12 Therefore will I divide him a portion with the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong; because he hath poured out his soul unto death: and he was numbered with the transgressors; and he bare the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors.
Daniel 12:2 And many of them that sleep in the dust of the earth shall awake, some to everlasting life, and some to shame and everlasting contempt.
So there is a promise of a resurrection and a judgment and of eternal life and we know there is one man chosen to judge and he does so through God’s Spirit upon him where he is a light even unto the Gentiles. The Gentiles will indeed need to believe in him in the last days.
Ezekiel 36:27 And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.
This is what I believe, there is much more to it, but I will keep it short right now,
Sin is death and the Spirit is life because of righteousness. Death has come to all men because Adam and Eve had sinned and brought forth mortality to all. The promised son of David to whom God became a Father to having begotten him of His Spirit to the cause of righteousness, is proof indeed that God’s Spirit is life because of righteousness. This Son was able to serve God above serving his flesh even overcoming the fear of death going to the cross. He is proof to the power of God’s Spirit aboding in a man and his death was a test where he was perfected and God could not hold him to death. He was resurrected unto eternal life where he continues to walk in all of God’s ways through the Spirit. Do we believe that he is a man worthy of life eternal because of God’s Spirit? Are we not justified through him as God can give us also of His Spirit and cause us to walk in all of God’s ways? Because he suffered do we believe all the more he has understanding in giving righteous judgement? Do we desire to receive the Spirit as he did, do we desire that God will fulfill Ezekiel 36, where the law becomes written in our hearts also?
Your response to me:
You to a post to Gene or Carmel said, “Answer me, how can Jesus be the “root” of Jesse/David/Solomon when both Matthew and Luke claim Jesus was conceived of the spirit? In order for Jesus to be a descendant of David, his father would have be a direct descendant of David; yet, he was conceived of the spirit. Honestly, this should give you your first clue that Jesus isn’t the Messiah.”
ME: Is this an example of what you previously believed and then assume I do, because I 100% don’t.
My response: please stop with the assumptions; the above is new. When I say “being on the same page”,s our beliefs aligned in our discussions with Carmel and Berean and I did say “basically” not “exactly.”
You: Isaiah 7 speaks of a virgin birth for the purpose of a sign regarding a king over David’s throne. Most Christians completely ignore this fact and turn the virgin birth of Jesus into falsehood.
Me: Isa 7:14 Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Look! the virgin is with child and she is about to give birth to a son, and she shall call his name ‘God with us.’ (Immanuel)
This passage been taken out of context to fit the “virgin” birth narrative in Matthew and Luke. The Hebrew word “almah” is used in this passage which means “young woman” or “young maid”; can a young woman be a “virgin” (as understood in modern terms of having never been with a man), yes; HOWEVER, the Hebrew word for a woman who has never been with a man is “bethulah.” This shows a major corruption of the text. Keep reading, the name of this child will be called “Immanuel”; was Jesus ever called “Immanuel” during his life time?
Reading the rest of the paragraph: 15 He shall eat curds and honey until he knows to reject the evil and to choose the good. 16 For before the boy knows to reject the evil and to choose the good, the land whose two kings you dread will be abandoned. How does this fit Jesus? Context is EVERYTHING!!
If we had read beginning in verse one, one will discover two nations were aligning themselves with Israel, the Northern Kingdom, and where coming against Judah, whose king was Ahaz, to conquer them. God said HE wasn’t going to allow it and the two nations aligning with the Northern Kingdom where going to fall and later the Northern Kingdom would also. Then God tells Ahaz to ask for a sign to show that God would not allow these kingdoms to come against Judah and Ahaz refused; so Isaiah tells him this young pregnant woman, that apparently was standing there also, would give birth to a child and before the child could reject evil and choose good the kingdoms plotting against Judah would be destroyed. This prophecy isn’t about a Messiah, let alone pointing to Jesus’ birth; it’s a sign for King Ahaz. Again, verse 14 has to be put into context with the surrounding verses; otherwise we can come up with some outlandish ideas…”immaculate conception” comes to mind.
With the above understanding, the entire genealogy accounts given become moot; besides they don’t match.
You: IT IS EVIDENTLY CLEAR THAT WHATEVER DOESN’T PLEASE YOU ESPECIALLY WHEN IT REVEALS YOUR SPIRITUAL WEAKNESS, YOU SIMPLY CALL IT A JOKE! DESPITE THE FACT THAT GOD IS AT WORK!
Me: Spiritually weak??!? Why because I don’t “measure up” to your level of “spirituality”? It’s what you write that is the joke.
You: ABEL WAS NEVER BORN OF EVE AT ALL THROUGH SEX, BUT THROUGH GOD’S INTERVENTION!
Me: have a passage that supports this?
You: ABEL WAS NEVER BORN OF EVE AT ALL THROUGH SEX, BUT THROUGH GOD’S INTERVENTION! LIKE ISAAC AND JESUS!
JUST TO CHEW A BIT MOORE!
THREE DIVINE CONCEPTIONS!
ONE ASSOCIATED TO THE SPIRIT, ONE ASSOCIATED TO THE SOUL, and ONE ASSOCIATED TO THE FLESH! JESUS’ TRIUNE SPIRIT!
THE BEGINNING OF ALL GOD’S BEGINNINGS
Me: Ummm, you go with that understanding! I don’t give credence to beliefs, only facts. Provide the facts and we can go from there.
You: I am more than convinced that SATAN MADE ABRAHAM IMPOTENT IMMEDIATELY AFTER HAVING SEX WITH THE SATANIC MAID, THE NOT ONLY THAT, BUT GOD AFTER GIVING ABRAHAM HIS SON, RESTORED ABRAHAM FERTILITY AGAIN.
Me: Again, you have a passage that supports Abraham became impotent or is this just your belief. Additionally, explain how Satan, a creation of God, could have power to challenge God his creator? Another fail! Satan only has the power granted by God; the created canNOT challenge its creator for supremacy, let alone ever be equal to or greater than its creator. Satan simply translates to advisory.
You: NOT ONLY THAT, BUT GOD AFTER GIVING ABRAHAM HIS SON, RESTORED ABRAHAM FERTILITY AGAIN.
Me: always with the yelling…WHY?!? Do you have evidence to back up your belief?
You: ALSO ISAAC WAS THE PRODUCT OF THE HOLY GHOST JESUS, THE SON OF GOD,
Me: Jesus is the Holy Ghost?!?!?!? So Jesus came down upon himself when John baptized him?!?
You: AS MUCH AS JACOB WAS THE PRODUCT OF “THE WORD” JESUS, THE SON OF MAN.
Me: So there was a fourth immaculate conceived man?
Then you go on to copy and paste an article from thetorah.com and in the article is talks about Paul adopting the writing of Philo, a Greek philosopher; and right there should give everyone pause to the validity of what Paul has to say as he is incorporating Greek philosophy into his teachings. Thank you once again for your wonderful comedic post. Are you planning on taking this on the road? As I have said in the past, run from whatever you believe; it is false!
@Gene,
You: You mixing up “commandment”, with “LAW” (forced compliance) , they’re not the same thing.
Me: Explain the difference.
You: What I meet by the “intent” of the law, was what the whole law was driving at in the first place.
Me: What is the law driving at? You haven’t explained.
You keep mentioning “forced obedience”; none were “forced” to obey God, just like today, it is a choice. Either follow his commands or not; follow them and there’s a positive outcome; don’t and there is a negative outcome.
You: The Israelites we’re unfaithful and lawless people, always rebelling against the commandments of God, so he shocked them with fear, and turned his, “loving commandments” into laws (forced obedience), because of their evil ways. Ex 20:20…> read it for yourself.
Me: Not exactly following where you are going since the Israelite’s had just come from captivity in Egypt, so they really couldn’t be said to be “unfaithful and lawless people, always rebelling against the commandments of God” since they hadn’t received them until the chapter you cite. At what point did God turn his “loving commandments” into laws of forced obedience?
Looking at the Exodus passage and including some surrounding verses so we have a clearer picture of what is being conveyed. Exod 20:18-21
18 And all the people were seeing the thunder and the lightning and the sound of the ram’s horn and the mountain smoking, and the people saw, and they trembled, and they stood at a distance. 19 And they said to Moses, “You speak with us, and we will listen, but let not God speak with us, lest we die.” 20 And Moses said to the people, “Do not be afraid. God has come to test you so that his fear will be before you so that you do not sin.” 21 And the people stood at a distance, and Moses approached the very thicak cloud where God was.
What exactly are you getting out of this passage; what you are saying, I don’t see.
In reply to post #945628, not once did you align the passages Isa 2:2-4; Micah 4:1-4; Zech 8:20-23; Zech 9:9-10; Zech 14:16 to the NT.
Where in the NT does it state in the last days “The mountain of the house of the Lord Will be established as the chief of the mountains, And will be raised above the hills; And all the nations will stream to it.” And where in the NT does it state: “And many peoples will come and say, “Come, let us go up to the mountain of the Lord, To the house of the God of Jacob; That He may teach us concerning His ways And that we may walk in His paths.”” Find the passage in the NT where “the law will go forth from Zion and the word of the Lord from Jerusalem.” Did Jesus ever teach the nations “will hammer their swords into plowshares and their spears into pruning hooks. Nation will not lift up sword against nation, And never again will they learn war.” This is Isa 2:2-4 and Micah 4:1-4 mirrors the same thing. All of this is to happen “in the last days”; has any of what has been spoken by the prophets been fulfilled or did we miss “the last days”?
In Zech 8:20-23 nations and many people will come and where are they going? They’re going to Jerusalem “to seek the LORD who rules over all and to ask his favor”; because “In those days ten people from all languages and nations will grasp hold of – indeed, grab – the robe of one Jew and say, “Let us go with you, for we have heard that God is with you.”” Where in the NT is this taught?
In Zech 9:9 Rejoice greatly, daughter of Zion! Shout, daughter of Jerusalem! Look! Your king is coming to you: he is legitimate and victorious, humble and riding on a donkey – on a young donkey, the foal of a female donkey. 10 I will remove the chariot from Ephraim and the warhorse from Jerusalem, and the battle bow will be removed. Then he will announce peace to the nations. His dominion will be from sea to sea and from the Euphrates River to the ends of the earth. Here is your mashiach, the messiah you are seeking. Has war been removed today; was it removed in Jesus’ time while he was here? The Messiah is to announce peace to the world and what did Jesus say in Matt 10:34 “Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword.” How can Jesus be the Messiah?
Zech 14:16 “And then every survivor from all those nations coming against Jerusalem will go up year after year to worship the king, Yahweh of hosts, and celebrate the Feast of Booths.” This one is self explanatory; but, what does the NT teach, Hell. By the way, Hell isn’t taught in the OT as a place one is sent. I see zero alignment between the OT and NT; how about you? Isn’t the OT the foundation to the NT?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
