- This topic has 25,959 replies, 116 voices, and was last updated 1 month ago by
.
- Posts
In the following “You” being myself and the “Me” being yourself continued from post #946829:
YOU: NO, I meant IMPROVABLE; because you cannot prove “in vitro” fertilization is what happened. This is a creation of your mind and is the most “logical” solution for you because we cannot have God impregnating mortal women because that’s what happened in the pagan religions of the day (Roman and Greek).
You go on to quote Is 7:14 as proof; yet, when one reads this chapter and the next, it has nothing to do with any messianic prophecy.
ME: You seem to have left out that my proof begins with how Matthew directly tells us that he is giving us the genetic line of Jesus to show how he is a genetic son of Abraham and David, where that genetic line that connects Jesus to Abraham and David, according to Matthew, is through Joseph, who was betrothed to Mary. Now if there were no further scriptures given about the conception of Jesus what is common sense? That Joseph and Mary would have come together so that Jesus could be exactly what the scripture say, a genetic son of Abraham and David through Joseph. But it turns out that there is more scripture about Jesus’s conception, do those details change at all the truth given in the prior scriptures? NO No matter how Jesus is conceived exactly, we are given that he is a genetic son of Abraham and David through Joseph. You and others just want to flat out ignore this fact directly provided from Matthew, you because you want to discredit Jesus as the Messiah and others because they want to make Jesus into a false god and some sort of hybrid one of a kind being. According to Matthew God didn’t impregnate Mary like that of a pagan god of mythology and impregnate her with His seed to create another god, some sort of hybrid being. God performed a miracle, where without Joseph and Mary coming together, He made Jesus a bio son of Joseph through the power of His Spirit, making him as Matthew tells us, a bio son of Abraham and David through Joseph.
Were do I begin? Your genealogical “proof” isn’t “proof” as it falls flat when Jechoniah was added into the line since his kingship was removed by God and there are no passages that state he was ever restored as a king (prediction: your entire focus in a response); so could any of his descendants have been inline to become king?
You go on to say “You and others just want to flat out ignore this fact directly provided from Matthew.” Who are the “others” and what “fact” of the lineage account am I ignoring? What’s being ignored is Jechoniah’s kingship was revoked and a revoked kingship means their descendants can’t be king either. Besides, how can I or anyone trust what the writer of Matthew says when they misuse Isa 7:14; do you trust those who distorts the truth?
Continuing on, you talk about Jesus’s conception and you “believe” the spirit took the biological “seed” from Joseph and planted it in Mary to impregnate her to connect the Jesus back to David, because Joseph “planting” his seed himself wouldn’t have been good enough? God had to have a “miraculously conception” and couldn’t wait a few more months for the two to come together? Why would God have to have the Jesus conceived supernaturally verses letting the two of them come together and make a baby the “old fashion” way? What would the significance of the “virgin” be? We can’t say purity, because we have “original sin” and no one is “righteous”, not one according to Paul.
Reading Isa 7:14 “Therefore, the Lord, of His own, shall give you a sign; behold, the young woman is with child, and she shall bear a son, and she shall call his name Immanuel.”
To whom has this sign been given? The answer is found in verse 10, King Ahaz.
“The young woman is with child.” So this woman is pregnant and standing with King Ahaz and Isaiah.
“she shall call his name Immanuel.” When was the Jesus ever called “Immanuel”; the angel told Mary to name the child “the Jesus.”
This verse speaks in their time and is a prophecy given to King Ahaz; why would Ahaz care about an event that is happening 700 years into the future when he’s about to be invaded. The fact the writer of Matthew hijacks this verse to say what it was never intended to say, makes the writer of Matthew a liar. What is sad is the modern church doubles down on the “virgin birth” lie (especially at Christmas) and calls it truth. Need more proof the writer lied, look at chapter 2:15 “out of Egypt I called my son”; this comes from Hosea 11:1 and explicitly states the “son” is Israel and not a “messianic figure” being called out of Egypt. Exo 4:22 further confirms Israel is God’s son AND HIS firstborn. Please explain how these passages from the Tanakh and their usage in the NT aligns!
Did you ever look up the difference for the Hebrew words “almah” and “betulah”?
Hi DT,
Just a little recap.
We had been discussing Isaiah 53, where you specifically gave me points for me to respond to and instead of replying back to my direct counter points you completely ignored them and went with, “There is only one thing that matters in your response and it has to do with whether the Jesus is the true Messiah or not and every response that doesn’t resolve this is pointless.” So I should have just ignored your previous points and questions, got it, lol.
YOU:
For your reading enjoyment here is what I posted originally posted concerning the Jesus being the true Messiah:
He must be Jewish
“…you may appoint a king over you, whom the L-rd your G-d shall choose: one from among your brethren shall you set as king over you.” (Deuteronomy 17:15)ME: You say that Jesus does not meet the requirements of the Messiah and you give me the list of the requirements established from the OT.
You later in another post from the one I provided above added that to be Jewish his mother needs to be Jewish. Jesus’s mother according to the NT was Jewish. By your own admission the first requirement you gave, Jesus indeed meets that criteria.
Regarding Deut 17:15, this is the specific verse you gave of proof that the OT requires the Messiah to be a Jew. If you would have said the requirement of the Messiah is that he be of Israel this would have made sense, but you didn’t and nothing in this passage says that the Messiah must specifically be a Jew.
Looks like you should have just left out your first requirement and the passage all together.
The reason the passage about the Messiah being Jewish is included, is because it’s a requirement; why would I leave it out? This wasn’t suppose to be “gotcha” moment! Out of the “list”, the Jesus fulfill one item. The Messiah can’t miss a single requirement outlined in the Tanakh and still be called the Messiah and since he only met one, it disqualifies him as being the true Messiah; he MUST do all of them. To say he will accomplish what was prophesied when he returns is improvable. Nothing is written that says the Messiah was to come, do nothing, leave for a couple millennia, and return one day. Why do the Jews reject the Jesus as the Messiah; he never did what was prophesied and there is no verse that says the Messiah was to come twice.
Rev 1:1 creates another problem for this returning of the Jesus,“The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave unto him, to shew unto his servants things which must shortly come to pass.” It been 2000 years; not really a “short” amount of time. To say time is irrelevant to God and it’s in God’s timing is only an excuse because the Jesus was speaking to a man who would have understood the events spoken in Revelation to actually mean these events were to take place “shortly”, meaning soon, not two millennia into the future. Let’s not forget the words of the Jesus in Matt 24:34 when he created another issue after saying, “Truly I tell you, this generation will not pass away until all these things have happened.” The temple was destroyed during their generation and Jesus never returned. It’s was a lie!
The major question remains, is the Jesus is the true Messiah; if he is, then why didn’t he accomplish ALL that was spoken of the Messiah while he was here; since he didn’t accomplish all that was prophesied, how can he claim to be the Messiah? It’s a tough pill to swallow, I struggled for months with what I started finding and if you would take the time and verify for yourself the things I have been writing…who knows what you’ll discover. Don’t let fear of the unknown control your life; begin verifying what is spoken of in the NT and ask if it actually aligns with what is written in the Tanakh. You really need to look into Noahide. I wish someone would have told me sooner; I wouldn’t have wasted 40 years of my life following an idol.
Concerning Isa 53, I asked for patience as I was going to speak on that separately; but you keep demanding it. Sorry, I have a life outside this forum that requires my attention more. I will definitely be writing on this “soon”, as understood by the christian world.
Hi DT,
Yes, of course Jesus would need to meet all of the requirements, not just one which is why I provided a response to each of the requirements that you gave.
YOU: The reason the passage about the Messiah being Jewish is included, is because it’s a requirement; why would I leave it out?
ME: The passage was Duet 17:15 and it speaks nothing about a requirement of the Messiah needing to be Jewish. The passage requires that the kings over Israel needed to be of Israel.
I am wanting to hold you accountable for asserting a passage says something when it in fact absolutely does not.
Hi DT,
YOU: To say he will accomplish what was prophesied when he returns is improvable. Nothing is written that says the Messiah was to come, do nothing, leave for a couple millennia, and return one day.
ME: Do nothing???????
Do we say he did nothing? We believe through God, according to God’s will, plan and by the power of His Spirit, that Jesus fulfilled Isaiah 53 for starters.
Are you listening to yourself? So thus it sounds like you ought not believe in any prophecy until it is fulfilled.
Hi DT,
YOU: The major question remains, is the Jesus is the true Messiah; if he is, then why didn’t he accomplish ALL that was spoken of the Messiah while he was here; since he didn’t accomplish all that was prophesied, how can he claim to be the Messiah? It’s a tough pill to swallow,
ME: You are speaking nonsense. You are taking your own disbelief and projecting it onto others. Do you think I relate to any sort of tough pill to swallow here, that’s ridiculous. TIME you speak of, you speak earthly, you are being very carnally minded. To God one day for Him is a thousand years for us. You have a problem with Jesus going to sit at God’s right hand to prepare the place for us to which God has planned? The Messiah is going to sit on David’s throne to rule the world and bring peace and destroy all the wicked, you have a problem with the Messiah being prepared by God to do so?
Hi DT,
Duet 17:18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him. 19 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.
Isaiah 61:1 The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon me; because the LORD hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound; 2 To proclaim the acceptable year of the LORD, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn; — JESUS
The Messiah that you believe has not yet come, he is not going to speak God’s word giving prophecy, speaking new truths? According to you, the Messiah can only speak God’s word that has been already given otherwise he should be seen as a liar, a false Messiah. Make it make sense DT.
According to Isaiah 61 the Messiah is going to preach good tidings, he is going to speak to the coming day of vengeance of our God, he’s going to give prophecy of future events. When Jesus speaks prophecy, because that prophecy is not also in the OT, that makes him a liar and a false prophet? DT, how do you even believe one prophet to be true, how does this work for you exactly? Out of all the prophets you don’t think that the prophet whose also the promised Messiah might have some astonishing news to reveal? Like there is a second coming, where then the Day of the LORD is fulfilled and it will be at a time where people can see that the world is just like that in the days of Noah and is just like Sodom and Gomorrah.
Hi DT,
YOU: Nothing is written that says the Messiah was to come, do nothing, leave for a couple millennia, and return one day. Why do the Jews reject the Jesus as the Messiah; he never did what was prophesied and there is no verse that says the Messiah was to come twice.
ME: Just to pull what I said all together in my last posts that was in reply to your statement above.
You say he did nothing, does the NT say he did nothing? NO! He fulfilled Isaiah 61, having God’s Spirit come upon him, making him into the righteous servant, where he then went out and preached God’s word of salvation and God’s kingdom. Jesus, the righteous servant and a prophet, prophesied of the future, which was of his own death for the sins of others, a fulfillment of Isaiah 53, of his resurrection and of a second coming where he fulfills at that time giving judgment, destroying the wicked, giving the Spirit, restoring Israel and establishing world peace. The only way for your argument to work for you, “no verse that says the Messiah was to come twice”, is if you also argue that a prophets prophecy must have already been given and written, which then how does that work with you exactly?
In the following “You” being myself and the “Me” being yourself
Yes, of course Jesus would need to meet all of the requirements, not just one which is why I provided a response to each of the requirements that you gave.
YOU: The reason the passage about the Messiah being Jewish is included, is because it’s a requirement; why would I leave it out?
ME: The passage was Duet 17:15 and it speaks nothing about a requirement of the Messiah needing to be Jewish. The passage requires that the kings over Israel needed to be of Israel.
I am wanting to hold you accountable for asserting a passage says something when it in fact absolutely does not,
I’m really not following your “gotcha moment”; it’s like you’re saying the Israelite’s aren’t Jewish. To me it appears you’re playing pretend, intentional ignorance. Are the Israelite’s of the Tanakh Jewish or not? Again, Paul tells us there isn’t a difference between Jew or Gentile; was Paul speaking of a single tribe – HARDLY! He was speaking of the nation of Israel; but you already know this. You go tell a Jew they aren’t Jewish because they don’t live in Israel; besides, the passages states “who is not your brother” and it’s their Jewishness that connects them, wherever they are. Again READ Ezra 9,10!!
Your last statement to hold me “accountable” is laughable! I’m still waiting for how Isa 7:14 is a fulfillment of the birth of the Jesus when it’s clearly NOT when read in context. The fact the writer uses the Isaiah passage as a prophecy pointing to the Jesus is deception, thus making the writer a liar and destroys the claim the NT is the “inerrant, inspired word of God” and repeating the “inspired” lie over and over again will never make it truth!
Hi DT,
YOU: To say he will accomplish what was prophesied when he returns is improvable. Nothing is written that says the Messiah was to come, do nothing, leave for a couple millennia, and return one day.
ME: Do nothing???????
Do we say he did nothing? We believe through God, according to God’s will, plan and by the power of His Spirit, that Jesus fulfilled Isaiah 53 for starters.
Are you listening to yourself? So thus it sounds like you ought not believe in any prophecy until it is fulfilled.
If only Isa 53 was speaking of the Jesus…let’s try again.
The “servant” is mentioned in Isa. 41:8-9; 44:1-2; 45:4; 48:20; 49:3 and it’s not a reference to a “messiah”, let alone the Jesus; but a reference to Jacob and Israel. Please explain how the servant changed from Jacob and Israel to the Jesus in 53, when in the chapters leading up to chapter 53 say the servant is Jacob and Israel?
Who are the “witnesses” and “my servant” in Isa 43:10; start reading in verse 1.
You like the “servant” of 42:1, but your “servant” is also blind verse 19.
In Jer 30:10, Jacob is called “my servant.”
In Jer 46:27&28 Jacob is called “my servant” again.
Read Luke 1:54 “He has helped Israel his servant”, once again the servant is explicitly stated to be Israel.
Why do you think I keep asking who is speaking where in Isa 52:13-53:12; knowing this helps with understanding the entire passage. In 52:13-15 the speaker is stating the servant will be elevated and this will “startle” many nations leaving the nations kings speechless. The kings then gain an “understanding” to the elevation of the servant. 52:15 says “kings shall shut their mouths For they shall see what has not been told them, and they shall consider with full attention what they have not heard.” The next response in 53:1 can only be the kings of nations asking who will believe what they came to understand (“our report”). Please explain how the “our” could possible be the disciples or the prophets speaking in 53:1; how does one go from shocked kings to disciples/prophets giving an unbelievable report? Do you begin reading a book in the middle?
Hi DT,
YOU: Nothing is written that says the Messiah was to come, do nothing, leave for a couple millennia, and return one day. Why do the Jews reject the Jesus as the Messiah; he never did what was prophesied and there is no verse that says the Messiah was to come twice.
ME: Just to pull what I said all together in my last posts that was in reply to your statement above.
You say he did nothing, does the NT say he did nothing? NO! He fulfilled Isaiah 61, having God’s Spirit come upon him, making him into the righteous servant, where he then went out and preached God’s word of salvation and God’s kingdom. Jesus, the righteous servant and a prophet, prophesied of the future, which was of his own death for the sins of others, a fulfillment of Isaiah 53, of his resurrection and of a second coming where he fulfills at that time giving judgment, destroying the wicked, giving the Spirit, restoring Israel and establishing world peace. The only way for your argument to work for you, “no verse that says the Messiah was to come twice”, is if you also argue that a prophets prophecy must have already been given and written, which then how does that work with you exactly?
In your previous post you quote Deut 18:18-19 and make the presumption it’s pointing to the Jesus; did you read 15-22, it’s speaking of future prophets God will be sending. In the same post you speak of a “second coming” and it being “astonishing news”, is that the way the Jewish people would have understood the writings of the prophets in Jesus’ day and would a messiah who comes twice have been the understanding prior to the Jesus?
Isa 61:1-2 how do you get the Jesus or a Messiah reference when Isaiah is the one who is speaking? I would highly recommend reading the entire chapter and not two verses. This passage is quoted or should I say misquoted in Luke 4:18-19 by the Jesus. The original passage in Isaiah says nothing about “recovering of sight to the blind”; but Luke adds this in and this isn’t corruption!?!?!?
Prophets were “commissioned” by God to deliver HIS message to the nation and the Jesus gave his supposed prophecies to primarily his disciples; but never to the nation.
You say the Jesus prophesied of his own death for the sins of others; I’ll ask again, when did God change his mind and say the innocent can take on the guilt of the wicked?
You say the Jesus will restore Israel when he returns, is that all Jewish people or only those who believe in Jesus?
One of these burning questions I’ve had is why will the Messiah provide a sin offering for himself and all the people? (Ezk 45:22) If the Jesus was sinless and is currently in heaven, what sin offering does he need to bring for himself?
DT, you said…….You say the Jesus prophesied of his own death for the sins of others; I’ll ask again, when did God change his mind and say the innocent can take on the guilt of the wicked?
Jesus whole life was for the sins of others, meaning all of mankind, he “DEMONSTRATED” to USA all, what is required OF us “ALL” to have a right relationship with God the Father, it requires our whole being to love and obey God the Fathers Will, as Jesus did, It is in that “SENSE”, he died for us all, not that he himself , Paid off anyone’s sin debt, we must all, “repent” and cease from signing, and come to live “Exactly” , As Jesus did, and that is what will takes away our sins. JESUS CLEARLY SAID …… > we are to “love the LORD our God with “ALL” our hearts, “ALL” our soul, “ALL” our minds, “ALL” our strength”.
Jesus came as a flesh human being to “DEMONSTRATE” TO US ALL WHAT IS “REQUIRED” OF US ALL. SO IT IS IN THAT “SENSE” , HE DIED FOR ALL, get it?Just as Paul said, Eph 4:13……> “till we “all” come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a “perfect” man, unto the measure of the stature of the, “FULLNESS” of CHRIST. Get it?
peace and love to you and yours DT……….gene
@Gene,
DT, you said…….You say the Jesus prophesied of his own death for the sins of others; I’ll ask again, when did God change his mind and say the innocent can take on the guilt of the wicked?
You may want to consult with Jodi as I copied and pasted her words. Stop shooting the messanger.
Jesus whole life was for the sins of others, meaning all of mankind, he “DEMONSTRATED” to USA all, what is required OF us “ALL” to have a right relationship with God the Father, it requires our whole being to love and obey God the Fathers Will, as Jesus did, It is in that “SENSE”, he died for us all, not that he himself , Paid off anyone’s sin debt, we must all, “repent” and cease from signing, and come to live “Exactly” , As Jesus did, and that is what will takes away our sins. JESUS CLEARLY SAID …… > we are to “love the LORD our God with “ALL” our hearts, “ALL” our soul, “ALL” our minds, “ALL” our strength”.
Jesus came as a flesh human being to “DEMONSTRATE” TO US ALL WHAT IS “REQUIRED” OF US ALL. SO IT IS IN THAT “SENSE” , HE DIED FOR ALL, get it?
When you say “it requires our whole being to love and obey God the Fathers Will, as Jesus did, It is in that “SENSE”, he died for us all”; please explain why the death of the Jesus was required if all we are to do is “love and obey” God? How does death equate to “loving and obeying” God?
You continue on, “we must all, “repent” and cease from signing, and come to live “Exactly” , As Jesus did, and that is what will takes away our sins.” Help me understand, we must repent and turn from our sins – I’m with you so far – but then there’s the “live exactly” as the Jesus. I don’t remember reading anything about living exactly like the Jesus and then God would take our sins away, you have a passage for this? Please also explain how we can live like the Jesus when “believers” in the Jesus haven’t been filled completely with the “holy spirit” as the Jesus had. Why didn’t God just “fill” all mankind with his spirit and then sin would be no more?
Finally you say, “Jesus came as a flesh human” – so, he’s divine?!? What you’re saying doesn’t make sense, explain exactly what did the Jesus “DEMONSTRATE” that mankind was to follow? He told everyone to keep the law.
Please make sense of it.
DT, you said…….> “Finally you say, “Jesus came as a flesh human” – so, he’s divine?!? What you’re saying doesn’t make sense, explain exactly what did the Jesus “DEMONSTRATE” that mankind was to follow? He told everyone to keep the law.
Please make sense of it.”
Me…..How does being born as a flesh being make you Devine? I don’t believe Jesus was Devine at all, if that were the case he could not have “DEMONSTRATED” how human flesh could live perfectly . He had to be “exactly” as we are, in ever sense, in order to demonstrate, to us all how to have a right relationship with God the Father, it is all based on “FAITH” in God, we must all come to that “exact same “FAITH” Jesus had, by the “EXACT SAME WAY the “man” Jesus did, through the working of the SPIRIT OF GOD, just as it says. ……> “for He (God) Works “IN” us both to “WILL” and do of “HIS” ( God’s), good pleasure”.
That is what Jesus “DEMONSTRATED” to us “ALL”, WHAT “FAITH” IS REQUIRED TO PLEASE GOD THE FATHER’S “WILL”. we must all come to give up our lives (the way we live) to the “will” of God the Father, by the exact same spirit working in Jesus Christ our lord.
Just as the apostle PAUL said..…>“till we “all” come in the unity of the “FAITH” , and the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a “PERFECT” man, unto the measure and of the stature of the, “FULLNESS” of Christ”.
REMEMBER what Jesus said, ….> ” he that will save “his life” (the way he lives) , will lose it, but he that will lose his life (the way he lives) for my sake, will save it. ”
Those are true words and applies to us all, we must all come to be, “exactly” like Jesus was, in our “FAITH”, In God the Father , that’s what it takes to become a Joint heir with Jesus . Hope this helped you better understand.
peace and love to you and yours DT………gene
@Gene,
What specifically did the Jesus “demonstrate” that mankind was to follow? You keep saying the same thing over and over that he “demonstrated”, but never say what he did. One leads by example, what did he do?
You keep saying we must have “faith” and “faith in God”; how do you understand “faith”, what does it mean to you? What was this “faith” the Jesus possessed that we don’t?
You also speak of the Jesus demonstrating how “the human flesh can live perfectly.” Is God looking for perfection from mankind?
DT, Can’t believe your so ignorant that you ask such questions, it only shows how much you truly do not know what scriptures say.
1….”FAITH IS, the substance of things hoped for, (how) by the “EVIDENCE” of things not seen. You need to get your own “proof” that God does actually exist, and is involved in you life. Without that you have only “suppositions” gained by hear sayer, as it appears you now have, by your words. You don’t seem to have proven God is actually in your life yet.
2…..God in scripture says, “Be you “HOLY” , because I am holy, be you “PERFECT” because I am PERFECT”.
DT, you seem to have very little retention of scriptures, why is that?
peace and love to you and yours DT…….gene
Hi DT,
YOU: I’m really not following your “gotcha moment”; it’s like you’re saying the Israelite’s aren’t Jewish. To me it appears you’re playing pretend, intentional ignorance. Are the Israelite’s of the Tanakh Jewish or not? Again, Paul tells us there isn’t a difference between Jew or Gentile; was Paul speaking of a single tribe – HARDLY! He was speaking of the nation of Israel; but you already know this. You go tell a Jew they aren’t Jewish because they don’t live in Israel; besides, the passages states “who is not your brother” and it’s their Jewishness that connects them, wherever they are. Again READ Ezra 9,10!!
ME: What are you talking about? I have said repeatedly that Jewish people are people of the tribe of Judah, to which is one tribe of the 12 tribes OF ISRAEL. This is not difficult, If you are of the tribe of Levi you are not Jewish/of the tribe of Judah, but both tribes of course are of Israel.
The NT specifically speaks to Israel which represents those of the twelve tribes, the word is found 73 times and as well the word Jews is in the NT, used 244 times. The people of Israel that were around when Jesus preached and when Paul and others preached were mostly all Jews, there were some of the tribe of Benjamin, but all other tribes were not around, as previously stated these tribes became considered as lost. The Pharisees and the Sadducees were Jewish sects who gave influence to the Jewish people, Christ came and called them vipers and hypocrites. We see the word Jew used so much in the NT because that was exactly the tribe of people that were being preached to. Not all of Israel are Jews but all Jews are of Israel, as said this should not be difficult, seems though as you are trying to say that at some point Jews came to be equated as representing all the people of Israel and not just the people of one tribe of Israel.
Deuteronomy 17:15 is God telling Israel that their king needed to be of Israel, this does not at all say that the promised coming Messiah needed to be a Jew, it’s talking about kings first of all and the first two kings of Israel were not Jews, they were of the tribe of Benjamin. We are given that the Messiah was to be king over Israel, so according to this scripture he must be of Israel. As said, I am just wanting to hold you accountable for what you say a scripture says that it does not. If you want to call it as me trying to give a gotcha moment whatever, it’s just silly because Jesus’s mom according to the NT was a Jew, so it really doesn’t matter, it’s just the passage you used to support a requirement does not align with the requirement you gave.
Concerning Isaiah 7, as I posted to you before, I have no problem with God giving in the OT a prophecy to events soon to take place that also foreshadow a second fulfillment to occur even later to which holds more significance. Isaiah 7 is just one and these only go to show how intelligent and powerful our God is in how He planned everything out. Isaiah 7 speaks of a child born and whose name will be called Immanuel, meaning God with us/or with us is God and who is not more of an Immanuel than the child born of Isaiah 9, to which I say is Jesus the anointed of God’s Spirit of Isaiah 42 and 61.
Jesus was born of the Spirit without measure and by such he was able to follow all of God’s commands. God was able to perfect this man through His Spirit. The Spirit of God in this Son of Man is proof that righteousness and unrelenting faith in God can thus be accomplished in all men as what God can accomplish in one He can certainly accomplish in all. Where the Spirit is there is life and we see Jesus raised from the dead and promised to be a firstborn of many brethren. DT, do you believe in self-righteousness or in the works of God’s Spirit? Did giving the law to Israel cause righteousness or did it reveal man’s weaknesses where sin abounded? God can forgive the worlds sins by one man, because the one man is proof that it actually takes God’s Spirit dwelling in you to be righteous. Don’t you see, forgiveness comes to all because no other had been given the Spirit without measure as he did and it is the Spirit that actually causes righteousness? We are not self-righteous we are bound to sin and death, only God with His Spirit is the source to righteousness and life. Our faith in God and hope is in that we too will receive God’s Spirit as that of Jesus Christ. This is not some wicked deception, it is truth. The purpose of Christ is that our faith and hope be in God, that as Jesus is so we shall be, and as Jesus is, is one who has been born of God’s Spirit. This is what Paul teaches, but to you he is wicked as well. You went from the darkness that is of mainstream Christianity to a new rabbit hole of darkness.
Hi DT,
YOU:
In your previous post you quote Deut 18:18-19 and make the presumption it’s pointing to the Jesus; did you read 15-22, it’s speaking of future prophets God will be sending. In the same post you speak of a “second coming” and it being “astonishing news”, is that the way the Jewish people would have understood the writings of the prophets in Jesus’ day and would a messiah who comes twice have been the understanding prior to the Jesus?
ME: Yes, of course the passage speaks to future prophets and Jesus according to the NT is himself a prophet, so Deuteronomy 18 is rightfully applied to him also in the NT in the book of Acts. This is just getting really stupid.
He’s not just a prophet in the NT but the promised Messiah where listening to his words of God has a final consequence according to the OT and NT, where the Messiah thus holds an ultimate fulfillment to the passage in Deuteronomy. The prophet Moses set Israel free from slavery and the Messiah is a prophet that sets men free as well, free from sin and death through the promised Spirit. There were many Jews that believed Jesus was the promised Messiah and then they thought he would become a king at that time but Jesus taught to them prophecy that him restoring Israel and becoming king would come later at a second coming. This is not against God’s word and plan from the OT it’s revealing more which is exactly what a prophet is to do. But your argument is that Jesus can’t be a prophet because apparently a prophet isn’t allowed to give prophecy, he’s only allowed to speak what has already been given.
YOU: Isa 61:1-2 how do you get the Jesus or a Messiah reference when Isaiah is the one who is speaking? I would highly recommend reading the entire chapter and not two verses. This passage is quoted or should I say misquoted in Luke 4:18-19 by the Jesus. The original passage in Isaiah says nothing about “recovering of sight to the blind”; but Luke adds this in and this isn’t corruption!?!?!?
ME: Luke 4:17 And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet Esaias. And when he had opened the book, he found the place where it was written, 18 The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised, 19 To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.
This is Luke quoting Jesus’s words and you think it’s corruption for the Messiah to extend on what Isaiah said to include something he knew he was going to do through his anointing that he’d recover the sight of the blind, a specific act of how he’d take someone of a broken heart and make them well? Or perhaps the very book Of Isaiah Jesus was reading from actually had that in it. But just listen to yourself, your saying it’s total corruption by Luke because he said that Jesus said he had been anointed of the Spirit and was sent to RESTORE THE EYES OF THE BLIND, which was both accomplished by Jesus literally and figuratively to which both took people of a broken heart and made them well as was prophesied.
DT,
YOU: You say the Jesus prophesied of his own death for the sins of others; I’ll ask again, when did God change his mind and say the innocent can take on the guilt of the wicked?
ME: I explained this to you thoroughly with scriptural examples, but your response was to ignore it and change the subject. God didn’t change his mind, you misinterpret that passage as I spoke to before. Did not the punishment given to Eve, God then cast upon her daughters after her who had not committed the sin she committed? I bore 2 children so I know for a fact I received a punishment directly because of another’s sin. Do you not have any concept of what it’s like to be a farmer? Thorns and thistles had only surrounded Adam and Eve’s home I suppose you want to tell me? In the day of judgment each will be judged according to themselves, not according to their father, but to say that God’s punishments given since Adam and Eve didn’t directly also effect their children is absurd.
Further, Adam and Eve’s punishment was that they would die which meant they were given weak mortal flesh that could die one way or another, which that too was cast upon all of humanity, right? If you can acknowledge this truth then perhaps you could then see the truth in Jesus Christ.
We were given curses, including weak mortal flesh that could die, because of another’s sin, but yet it’s then outrageous to think that we could receive grace and immortal flesh that cannot die because of another’s righteousness? It’s outrageous to think that the lesson is that God is the source, that we need His Spirit to be made righteous?
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
