|
Replies: 46
| visibility 1
|
Orange Blooded [2147]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 2571
Joined: 6/4/22
|
I asked this question in another thread but figured
1
Mar 23, 2023, 7:55 PM
|
|
it deserved its own.
In Acts when Stephen was stoned he seemed to call down the Pharisees and former Old Testament figures:
“However, the Most High does not live in houses made by human hands. As the prophet says:
49 “‘Heaven is my throne,
and the earth is my footstool.
What kind of house will you build for me?
says the Lord.
Or where will my resting place be?
50 Has not my hand made all these things?’
This brings to mind some of the way Jesus went against the Old Testament...
First, he often rebuked fellow Jews for their strict adherence to the Jewish laws.
He changed the dietary laws, view of divorce, and pretty much negated the sabbath. All things given to Israel by the OT god Yahweh.
Could Jesus have actually thought he was Yahweh in the flesh, or has christianity invented and developed that idea?
|
|
|
|
 |
Oculus Spirit [93604]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95383
Joined: 12/25/09
|
Re: I asked this question in another thread but figured
2
Mar 23, 2023, 11:55 PM
|
|
Jesus did not admonish the Pharisees for their adherence to The Law. He and John the Baptist called them out for being hypocritical. The best example is that they tithed the mint of their gardens then told their own parent, who were in need of basics like food and clothing, that God had all their money.
He embarrassed them for preparing to stone a woman taken in adultery by writing with His finger in the dust on the ground. Many, and I, believe He wrote the 10 Commandments. He said let him who is without sin cast the first stone.
Divorce was added to the law originally by man's request. It was allowed only in cases of fornication. Many confuse that to say if your wife fornicates with another man while she is married to you then you are entitled to a divorce. That is dead wrong for a wife who sleeps around has committed adultery.
In Israel a woman was either a virgin or a harlot. If she married under the guise of being a virgin and her bridegroom discovered she wasn't then the Levitical Law provided the man a option to put the woman away, divorce.
Today there is not such law in God's eyes. There is not excuse for divorce, none. Jesus was the only man who ever lived who flawlessly kept the law.
You know just enough about The Bible to be dangerous to yourself and anyone who pays any attention to your comments on it. I love you anyway.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2147]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 2571
Joined: 6/4/22
|
Re: I asked this question in another thread but figured
1
Mar 24, 2023, 7:35 AM
|
|
“ He and John the Baptist called them out for being hypocritical.”
Don’t you fuss at me for doing that? 😉
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93604]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95383
Joined: 12/25/09
|
Yeah, because it steps on my toes more than anyone's.
1
Mar 24, 2023, 9:26 AM
|
|
The real hypocrites are those like me who are born again and face God on a daily basis with a good understanding of what He wants for our lives yet misbehave constantly. If Paul knew me he would have been reluctant to claim the title chiefest of sinners.
Yes, I fuss at you for calling them out but you're not about to die on a cross to pay for their sins. It's possible you are doing the same thing they are doing. Are you satisfied with your righteousness? According to you, they look at you and because you drink they take pride in that they don't drink. I'm not sure that's true but that's how you present it.
I see you as a child of God who slipped away for a season, a younger brother who ended up taking his inheritance and went whoring in the world. I promise, when you return to our Father I won't be the one complaining about the celebration in Heaven. I'll rejoice too.
I don't think I know anyone who has more to unlearn about the Bible than you. Maybe it's because we spend a lot of time going back and forth about it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2147]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 2571
Joined: 6/4/22
|
Re: I asked this question in another thread but figured
1
Mar 24, 2023, 2:58 PM
[ in reply to Re: I asked this question in another thread but figured ] |
|
“You know just enough about The Bible to be dangerous to yourself and anyone who pays any attention to your comments on it. I love you anyway.”
I know just as much about the Bible if not more than you.
Just because I don’t harmonize it to fit my theological agenda like you do doesn’t mean I’m not knowledgeable on the subject.
I’m familiar with the entire Old Testament having studied it my entire life and I’ve read the New Testament gospel by gospel, letter by letter, and researched and read plenty on textual criticism, what is known about the origins and how these writings were passed down through the centuries.
Every argument you use against me I’ve heard before and, ironically, taught it myself.
Plenty of times I’ve sat in front of a small group on a Sunday morning and discussed Jesus and the law of Moses.
The bottom line is he did change things about it. The story you refer to about the woman in adultery is a perfect example. The Jews were doing what was commanded in the law. Stoning a woman caught in adultery.
What sense would it make for the god who gave the law to come down in human form, and ridicule the people he gave the command to, for doing the very thing he commanded?
The answer is Jesus never saw himself as the god who gave the law. People came along after the fact and turned him into that god, or attempted to.
And here you are thousands of years later still attempting to harmonize Jesus with that idea.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93604]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95383
Joined: 12/25/09
|
You're offended.
1
Apr 1, 2023, 10:51 AM
|
|
"Every argument you use against me,' indicates that you think that I oppose you. Not only do you fail to see the story of scripture as a whole but also view my trying to show you the big picture as an attack on your beliefs.
You are oblivious to the fact that there are Christians here who read our post and that I'm obligated to explain the scripture according to II Timothy 3:
"16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:
17 That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works."
Even though I'm convinced that you are arguing your religion I am obligated to disclose the doctrine of God given in His Word. If you knew what Paul meant when he wrote that to Timothy and why it is a portion of God's Holy Word you would know that my disagreements with you are well founded in God's Word which, BTW, you so boldly claim you know. What was it, front to back?
I'll agree with you that God coming in the body of man and suffering the penalty of the law makes no sense. The human mind has no frame of reference for love which drives anyone to sacrifice their only son to save his enemies. Those who believe Jesus is The Only Begotten of God struggle with the overwhelming truth that God took on flesh and gave His life for us. That is the most sobering truth ever known.
'Jesus never saw himself as the god who gave the law.
John 10:
"25 Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me.
26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.
27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:
28 And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand.
29 My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand.
30 I and my Father are one."
You must have forgotten that passage for you once claimed that you liked the red letter edition and those words in bold are in red letters in my Bible.
And here you are thousands of years later still attempting to harmonize Jesus with that idea.
I'm not trying to do anything but teach. You make your claims to the truth by picking and choosing bits and pieces. You contradict yourself for in one post you claim to be seeking holiness by asking questions and in these statements you admit that you're posing your arguments rather than seeking understanding.
That's fine, there may be Christians here who also fail to spend enough time reading God's Word to understand Its harmony from Gen 1:1 to the last word in Revelation 22:21.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2147]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 2571
Joined: 6/4/22
|
Re: You're offended.
Apr 1, 2023, 11:43 AM
|
|
You’re right I shouldn’t have said “arguments against me” as if it’s personal and your responses are all about me.
That being said I’m not offended at all. I’m just honestly and openly discussing this stuff.
It’s a legitimate observation that Jesus and the apostles said and did things contrary to the Old Testament.
You got offended by that and said I was dangerous because my knowledge of the Bible is somehow incomplete because I don’t view it the way you do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93604]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95383
Joined: 12/25/09
|
You are not an exclusive reader of this forum.
1
Apr 1, 2023, 5:06 PM
|
|
Seldom do I direct a response to you. You just happened across one which was customized almost exclusively for you and feign me replying to you exclusively. Even though I plainly stated that the Truth must be told, you insist that everything is about you.
This will be what, the fifth time I've explained the legal concept of there being three ways to void a contract. The covenant God made with Moses and the Israelites was a contract, it was formed and became law some short while after the COI made their exit from Egypt. God, "You do all this and I will do all that,' to which all of the COI replied, 'We will do it.'
In Deu 28, God reiterated and recapped the contract to the second generation of COI due to the original generation, which exited Egypt, having died out on their ~40 year walk in the desert. They died because they provoked God with their disobedience and doubt. Read Deu 28 for yourself.
We must understanding the law to comprehend the change. There are three ways, even today, to void a contract.
The first is for both parties agreeing to make it void.
The second is for both parties to renegotiate another contract which changes the terms of the original.
Jesus, My Christ took the third option. He fulfilled the contract. If you hired me to paint your house for an agreed upon sum of money or other consideration, I fulfilled my contractual obligation(s) by painting your house and you paid me the sum we agreed upon or performed the service you were under contract to do: The contract would be void and mean it's no more than a record for paying taxes.
Jesus fulfilled God's covenant/contract with Israel. We are not now under the law. God took on the body of man to die to pay our contractual obligation.
Bless God, I'm free of the Law of sin and death.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29810]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8828
Joined: 10/31/10
|
Re: I asked this question in another thread but figured
1
Mar 24, 2023, 8:37 AM
|
|
>Could Jesus have actually thought he was Yahweh in the flesh, or has christianity invented and developed that idea?
John 10:30 “I and the Father are one.”
John 8:58 “Very truly I tell you, . . . before Abraham was born, I am!”
John 1:1 “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God”
followed by John 1:14 “The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us.
Now, some of that is John talking, and some of that is John saying "Jesus said this."
So if one believes what John says, then yes, Jesus said in effect he was God.
But as always, does one trust the messenger? John in this case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93604]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95383
Joined: 12/25/09
|
Frankly, I don't trust any man.
2
Mar 24, 2023, 9:38 AM
|
|
However, by pure logic and intellect, (1) if God is as I believe, able to design and create such a magnificent existence as this universe surely He is able to produce, protect and provide a message to those like me who respect Him as God.
You've read the Bible. It records one man who lived a sinless life. Some of the greatest Bible heroes committed the most heinous acts. David, took a man's wife and had the man killed. Yet, I read the Psalms separate from the OT and NT in that I start at the beginning of each of the three and read them though then start again. King David is my hero.
I try to memorize verses and passages from the OT and NT. In Psalms I try to memorize chapters. No, I'm not tackling chpt 119. 
1. Your logic and intellect, not mine.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29810]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8828
Joined: 10/31/10
|
Re: Frankly, I don't trust any man.
2
Mar 24, 2023, 10:03 AM
|
|
> surely He is able to produce, protect and provide a message to those like me who respect Him as God
Absolutely. If one is getting the message directly from God, they don't need John or anyone else to filter or interpret it. ">
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93604]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95383
Joined: 12/25/09
|
That's not exactly what I meant.
2
Mar 24, 2023, 11:35 AM
|
|
I danced around the point rather than being forward about it. If God is who I believe with all my heart to be and He used a messenger like David He can surely have used all the other sinners who authored the Bible, the scribes who reproduced and protected it and the King James scholars who translated it.
That seems so much more simple than conceiving quantum forces and coordinating them with gravity, integrating them with magnetism, thereby creating mass and then creating life which reproduces life.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2147]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 2571
Joined: 6/4/22
|
Re: I asked this question in another thread but figured
1
Mar 24, 2023, 11:13 AM
[ in reply to Re: I asked this question in another thread but figured ] |
|
That was “John”, whoever that was, writing possibly a century or more later. So that doesn’t prove that it wasn’t an idea that developed later.
If Jesus was in fact Yahweh, why did his stance on the law change?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2147]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 2571
Joined: 6/4/22
|
Re: I asked this question in another thread but figured
1
Mar 24, 2023, 11:13 AM
|
|
Doesn’t the Bible also say “god does not change”?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29810]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8828
Joined: 10/31/10
|
Re: I asked this question in another thread but figured
1
Mar 24, 2023, 7:18 PM
|
|
>So that doesn’t prove that it wasn’t an idea that developed later.
Sure. That's why I put that conditional in there. 1) John could have an understanding of the truth that he is passing on to us or 2) John could be lying, deliberately or unintentionally, or 3) God could have come to John in that way and to others in other ways.
We really have no way of telling which of those three it is, other than faith in whichever way one believes it is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29810]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8828
Joined: 10/31/10
|
Re: I asked this question in another thread but figured
1
Mar 24, 2023, 7:29 PM
[ in reply to Re: I asked this question in another thread but figured ] |
|
>Doesn’t the Bible also say “god does not change”?
I think there may be a passage or two that say that if I dig around hard enough, but there are lots of examples where God does change. Or at least changes his mind. I suppose a counter-argument could be made as to what change means exactly. Getting haggled down before Sodom and Gommorah was one right off the top of my head.
Moses also talked God's fury down in Exodus 32:14 "So the Lord relented from the harm which He said He would do to His people."
Amos talked God out of unleashing locusts in Israel in Amos 7:
2 And so it was, when they had finished eating the grass of the land, that I said:
“O Lord God, forgive, I pray!
Oh, that Jacob may stand,
For he is small!”
3 So the Lord relented concerning this.
“It shall not be,” said the Lord.
Same thing with the folks in Ninevah in Jonah 3:
9 Who can tell if God will turn and relent, and turn away from His fierce anger, so that we may not perish?
10 Then God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God relented from the disaster that He had said He would bring upon them, and He did not do it.
There's probably many more examples of God changing his mind or his rules. Those are just ones I found quickly.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93604]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95383
Joined: 12/25/09
|
"John, whoever that was..." really?
1
Mar 24, 2023, 11:46 AM
[ in reply to Re: I asked this question in another thread but figured ] |
|
John walked with Jesus who was God in the flesh.
When did Jesus change the law He fulfilled the law. The law was a contract between God and man; you do this and I'll do that. Man couldn't keep up his end of the agreement but Jesus kept it for us. He died for our sin. The contract was executed, finished, kapoosh.
In order to qualify to fulfill the contract Jesus had to live according to the law and under the law until His death and so He did.
Don't make this more complicated that it is. If you offered me 50 bucks to detail your car and I spent the entire weekend watching old Clemson football games and drinking beer then Sunday afternoon you son went out and detailed your car perfectly and you realized your son loved uncle Dan enough to hold up my end of the bargain my part of the contract would be fulfilled.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2147]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 2571
Joined: 6/4/22
|
Re: "John, whoever that was..." really?
1
Mar 24, 2023, 1:26 PM
|
|
The gospel of John is dated to the early 90s AD at best. A lot of scholars place it in the second century.
You have no idea who wrote that book, and whether or not it truly came from a follower of Jesus.
Jesus did abolish the sabbath and dietary laws. Why would the Jews of his day believe him and go against what they were taught was scripture and god’s law?
That’s how it’s obvious that Jesus divinity and the claim that he was Yahweh clearly came later.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93604]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95383
Joined: 12/25/09
|
They ought to be ill about Jesus's claims.
1
Mar 24, 2023, 3:33 PM
|
|
He undermined their entire existence by fulfilling the law and changing the term Children of Israel from including those of Hebrew heritage to we who are born again. We got their Messiah when He ended their need for animal sacrifice and destroyed their religion.
They rejected Him and He offered His service to the world just as God planned and just as the prophets predicted.
They don't have a temple much less a Holy of Holy to enter and serve God. They, if not for their obstinate view could get saved just like anyone else.
I could agree with them but there's no point in helping them be wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29810]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8828
Joined: 10/31/10
|
Re: "John, whoever that was..." really?
Mar 24, 2023, 8:15 PM
[ in reply to Re: "John, whoever that was..." really? ] |
|
>Why would the Jews of his day believe him and go against what they were taught was scripture and god’s law?
This is an interesting point and one that I hope to take a close look at later on once I do a little more research. The gist of the point though is that in the immediate wake of Jesus's death, hardly anything happened.
What I mean is, the Temple kept right on functioning as usual for another 2 generations - 40 years or so. God didn't intervene and shake it to the ground in an earthquake, or compel everyone to leave with locusts. He let sacrifices go on in his name without interruption for a long, long time.
So the sacrifices went on, day after day after day, till the Romans showed up in 70 AD. And if anything was written about Jesus it wasn't till 20 years after his death, maybe around 50 AD. If there is earlier stuff, like the hypothetical Q Document, we don't have it. So aside from his local followers, and the missionaries that were sent out, the world stayed pretty much the same. That was bad for lambs and sheep.
But the religion did survive, and grow. And so the message, and the lifestyle, was compelling enough to folks to get some to believe. Acts shows it wasn't easy. Those guys put their lives in danger time and again and got rejected, time and again. It would have been easy to keep the status quo. And safer.
Where I'm headed is two-fold. First, if the Jews had been smarter politically, and the Temple not been destroyed, would it still be functioning today with God's approval? Jews don't have a temple but they still have a religion, and they have suffered just as badly through the years as the early Christians did to maintain the Jewish religion.
And second, what would cause people to risk their lives to make such a drastic change in their lives? To go against everything you had ever learned or ever been taught? It must have been kind of hard to hide being an early Christian. Simply not showing up to the continuing Temple sacrifices had to be a dead giveaway. "Hey Joel, where has Ezekial been? Haven't seen him the last few sacrifices. Do you suppose he's hanging out with the Christians?"
I mean, say you were a Christian in 60 AD. You know the Jews had to be saying to you: "You're still following that guy who died 30 years ago? Why don't you come back to the Temple and we'll study scripture together with the guys, like we used to when we were kids. If God changed the rules on us surely there would be more evidence than the basically none since this Jesus fellow died. Where is the healing? Where are the miracles? All that stuff was made up by people your father knew. Otherwise those followers would still be doing miracles today, right? I mean, you're too young to have met the guy, so why do you even believe in those tales? You don't want to make Yahweh angry by continuing to disobey him and ignore his laws. We have enough historical evidence to show where that leads. Go look at the pillars of salt down by Gomorrah if you need proof. You're going to risk getting a lightning bolt because some dead guy told you the rules changed three decades ago? And se still do sacrifices? Even he said you should not stray from the Law, not one iota. And you're putting your faith in him, over 2000 years of proven history? Oy vey."
Man what a fascinating time. Imagine the pressure on those guys. Should make for some incredible discussion down the line, evaluating their daily lives and the growth of the fledgling religion to a world religion.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93604]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95383
Joined: 12/25/09
|
Your comments shouldn't be stuck in obscurity...
1
Mar 25, 2023, 5:08 AM
|
|
this deep in a thread.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2147]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 2571
Joined: 6/4/22
|
Re: "John, whoever that was..." really?
1
Mar 25, 2023, 8:36 AM
[ in reply to Re: "John, whoever that was..." really? ] |
|
"And second, what would cause people to risk their lives to make such a drastic change in their lives? To go against everything you had ever learned or ever been taught? It must have been kind of hard to hide being an early Christian. Simply not showing up to the continuing Temple sacrifices had to be a dead giveaway. "Hey Joel, where has Ezekial been? Haven't seen him the last few sacrifices. Do you suppose he's hanging out with the Christians?"
Maybe they were just fed up with the status quo. We know there was a huge social divide between the have and have nots. Jesus clearly favored the have nots.
It's kind of like christianity today.
You have the old school legalistic fundamentalist group and you have what these people refer to as "new age christianity".
The latter likes to focus on love and acceptance and are not as concerned with a strict, literal understanding of the bible.
If you go in just about any church today, especially those that were established decades ago, you have this fight going on between these two factions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [17857]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8922
Joined: 12/24/96
|
Jesus did not abolish the Sabbath
1
Mar 25, 2023, 2:26 PM
[ in reply to Re: "John, whoever that was..." really? ] |
|
He still went to the Temple, "as was His custom", to teach from the Law. And the "Dietary" laws He changed...what?
I know I am late to this conversation, but you are just trying to start an argument I believe. NO ONE who has read the "Law" thinks Jesus changed the "Law." What Law, other than this dietary concern you have, did Jesus change? And do you know why there was "dietary law" to begin with? Do you know that now, in Jesus, the Jew and the Gentile are united?
Did Jesus rebuke the Temple Leaders? Yes. Do you know why? If you think it was because He was changing the Law then you only think you know the answer, but are gravely mistaken. Do you know why He kicked over the money changers tables and called the Temple a "den of thieves"? Do you know why Jesus rebuked the leadership and said they were like whitewashed tombs, beautiful on the outside but full of dead men's bones?
Also, Do you know the difference between Temple law, civil law, and moral law... all of which are given in the Old Testament?
Jesus is the fulfillment of the Law.
Message was edited by: HuntClub®
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2147]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 2571
Joined: 6/4/22
|
Re: Jesus did not abolish the Sabbath
1
Mar 25, 2023, 2:51 PM
|
|
Let's not get into semantics just to win the argument.
I've listed the ways Jesus went against the Old Testament Jewish customs handed down by god but I will again.
It was customary for a woman to be stoned who was caught in adultery. Jesus rebuked the Pharisees for following this law.
He rebuked them for calling on him and his followers to keep the sabbath.
And he challenged the way divorce and cleanliness regarding food was viewed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [17857]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8922
Joined: 12/24/96
|
Your semantics are lies
1
Mar 25, 2023, 3:51 PM
|
|
You twist a truth and make it a lie.
Jesus rebuked the pharisees because they said it was not legal to "work" on the Sabbath. Specifically, for healing a withered hand. Jesus clearly showed them the Sabbath was given as a day of rest... not as a day filled with another rule. Jesus also showed them He is Lord of the Sabbath just as He is Lord of every other day. BTW, what is easier to say, "Your sins are forgiven you, or, Rise up and take your mat, and walk"?
It was customary for stoning when (any)one broke a number of "Moral" laws. There is no need for a man to stone another now, for breaking moral laws, because Jesus has paid the price for sin and offers forgiveness in Him. Oh, judgment will come (through Jesus) but this is the age of Grace. Jesus has fulfilled this particular Law of "punishment" in this age.
Moses allowed Divorce, because of the "hardness of the man's heart", Jesus said it was not always so. And that it was permitted by Moses does not mean God [sanctioned] it. Neither did Jesus. The Pharisees asked if one could divorce for any old reason. Jesus said "NO!" If fact, Jesus made the [understanding] of what divorce is in ones life more fearful. His teaching is there for all to see and fully understand, if they can bear it.
Once again, truth is there.
You are, whether deliberately or not, making a mockery of God's word.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2147]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 2571
Joined: 6/4/22
|
Re: Your semantics are lies
1
Mar 25, 2023, 5:04 PM
|
|
I'm not lying about anything. I'm just plainly reading and looking at what Jesus said and did, without presumptions.
You read the bible through a protestant christian lense.
There are many Jews, Muslims, and people of all different types of beliefs who take a different interpretation of Jesus and his actions meant.
If we brought in a Jewish Rabbi to this discussion he would say it's YOU who is twisting the truth.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [17857]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8922
Joined: 12/24/96
|
Someone else who refuses to accept Jesus for who He is?
1
Mar 25, 2023, 5:16 PM
|
|
Sure, bring a Jewish Priest to the party.
But you, you are not keeping scripture in context.
If I tell you that the car you are about to drive off in needs gas before you can really get anywhere, and you fill it up and drive it as far as it can go, until running out of gas and then strands you on the side of the road, am I responsible for the car running out of gas because you didn't continue to fill it up when you needed to? No, I am not.
If I am an authority of automotive engineering and practical usage, even writing an entire text book on the subject, which is used in every automotive mechanic school, but only explain to you the importance of gasoline to a cars function, but you pout it in the place for motor oil, am I responsible because you didn't read the rest of the instructions that are provided with the car. No, I am not.
But, there are people who will argue I am. Simply because they didn't hear, or read, the rest off the story.
You keep hanging on to your "one liners" and you will remain stranded.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2147]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 2571
Joined: 6/4/22
|
Re: Someone else who refuses to accept Jesus for who He is?
1
Mar 25, 2023, 6:11 PM
|
|
I don't think you're understanding my point.
You are interpreting Jesus and the Old Testament as though they are intertwined, and that the latter pointed to the former.
Everyone doesn't take that view of the Old Testament. In fact more people than not say that the Old Testament does not point to Jesus, or find it's fulfillment in Jesus.
There are more Jews and Muslims combined than there are total christians. They believe the Old Testament is the word of god just like you do. But they don't see the New Testament or Jesus the way you do.
Islam says Jesus was a great prophet who was turned into something he was not by christians.
Jews say Jesus was nothing but a rebel rouser among many first century messiahs who got himself killed and never rose from the dead.
Same Old Testament, different truths.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2147]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 2571
Joined: 6/4/22
|
Re: Jesus did not abolish the Sabbath
1
Mar 25, 2023, 3:44 PM
[ in reply to Jesus did not abolish the Sabbath ] |
|
Also, centuries of Jews studied the Jewish scriptures. None of them interpreted the Old Testament to be pointing towards a messiah like Jesus.
So this is another point where we see that the bible can not be called "truth".
Jesus being the "fulfillment of the law" is not truth for everyone who believes in the Old Testament.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [17857]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8922
Joined: 12/24/96
|
Re: Jesus did not abolish the Sabbath
1
Mar 25, 2023, 5:28 PM
|
|
Those wise men, who came from the East, they prove you wrong. That the Jews were awaiting a Messiah is abundantly clear. They even knew He would come from Bethlehem. They just didn't like the fact he wasn't from one of their family lines...or that He wasn't a politician come to set up Israel as the pinnacle of glory, casting out the Gentiles for the dogs that they are.
They didn't like Him because He did know they were whitewashed tombs full of dead men's bones.
They didn't like Him because He spoke with authority.
They didn't like Him because He acted with authority.
They didn't like Him because even the demons fled from His presence, because He was the One with authority.
They didn't like Him because He healed the lepers and the unclean.
They didn't like Him because He fed the hungry simply because they were with Him.
They didn't like Him because He never asked for anything in return for the [love] He gave to them.
They didn't like Him because He did not play politics with those souls before Him, not then and not now.
They still don't like Him because they cannot replace Him.
They, like many in this world, do not like Him because He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life; and no one comes to the Father but through Him.
Ever.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2147]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 2571
Joined: 6/4/22
|
Re: Jesus did not abolish the Sabbath
1
Mar 25, 2023, 6:06 PM
|
|
I never said they were not waiting for a messiah. I said they were not looking for a messiah like Jesus.
They were looking for a conquering messiah. Not a humble servant.
Same book. Different interpretation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [17857]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8922
Joined: 12/24/96
|
Re: Jesus did not abolish the Sabbath
2
Mar 25, 2023, 8:54 PM
|
|
That they were awaiting a conquering Messiah, this we agree on. That they did not, and still do not, accept Jesus, we agree on.
Interpretation or misinterpretation?
That Jesus came is the point. That He will come again, that is another point. The Second Coming of Christ will be as a Conquering Christ. The first coming was to fulfill many things God promised, such as bringing justice to the Gentiles...as a covenant to the people and a light unto the Gentiles...." Not to destroy them as the Jews had hoped. Had they forgotten that even God had used the Gentiles to punish Israel? Had they forgotten God's promise through Israel to the Gentiles? Or did they just reject it?
The first coming was fulfillment of Isaiah 42:1-9:
“Behold! My Servant whom I uphold,
My Elect One in whom My soul delights!
I have put My Spirit upon Him;
He will bring forth justice to the Gentiles.
2 He will not cry out, nor raise His voice,
Nor cause His voice to be heard in the street.
3 A bruised reed He will not break,
And smoking flax He will not quench;
He will bring forth justice for truth.
4 He will not fail nor be discouraged,
Till He has established justice in the earth;
And the coastlands shall wait for His law.”
5 Thus says God the LORD,
Who created the heavens and stretched them out,
Who spread forth the earth and that which comes from it,
Who gives breath to the people on it,
And spirit to those who walk on it:
6 “I, the LORD, have called You in righteousness,
And will hold Your hand;
I will keep You and give You as a covenant to the people,
As a light to the Gentiles,
7 To open blind eyes,
To bring out prisoners from the prison,
Those who sit in darkness from the prison house.
8 I am the LORD, that is My name;
And My glory I will not give to another,
Nor My praise to carved images.
9 Behold, the former things have come to pass,
And new things I declare;
Before they spring forth I tell you of them.”
Honestly, I don't care how a Muslim interprets the Old Testament. They don't think Israel was/is the Son of Promise either, so there is that, too. Some Muslims have taught that Jesus and Muhammad are brothers as well. Yet, Their culture is one where the eldest brother represents the Father and gives instruction for the Father. But they stand for the younger brother, to undermine the elder? Wonder how they think that went for Muhammad when he got back to heaven and had to answer to the elder brother before the Father? Especially for the war they have waged throughout the centuries against Christians. (And yes, the crusades were a horrible thing, but they were a response to the Muslims killing all of the Christians. Or has the whole world forgotten the Christians were there long before the Muslims started killing them? Anyone who teaches otherwise is a revisionist.) But, back to the point, they (Muslims) won't address Jesus being an elder brother concern. Or, do they think God made a mistake sending the elder brother first, or to begin with?
Scripture points to Christ, it is clear to see. Especially for our generation. Which is all the more amazing that one would deny it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93604]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95383
Joined: 12/25/09
|
Coupled, the OT and NT are a story of scripture.
2
Mar 25, 2023, 6:26 PM
[ in reply to Re: Jesus did not abolish the Sabbath ] |
|
There are many promises of a Savior in the OT. Genesis 3:16 to start. Psalms 22 in my favorite and if you'll agree to admit your knowledge of the Bible is lacking I will dig up half a dozen different prophets beside David that make mention of a Messiah.
Just read Psa 22 and tell me who it is about if it's not about Jesus. That's open for anyone reading this post. If you need an expose' on 22 I will provide it with pleasure.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2147]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 2571
Joined: 6/4/22
|
Re: Coupled, the OT and NT are a story of scripture.
1
Mar 25, 2023, 7:08 PM
|
|
"Coupled, the OT and NT are a story of scripture"
That is your modern day christian view of your version of the bible, and that's fine if you hold that view.
What is "scripture" to you is not scripture to everyone.
What is "truth" to you is not truth to everyone.
Am I fair in making those statements?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93604]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95383
Joined: 12/25/09
|
Maybe, but don't change the subject.***
1
Mar 26, 2023, 8:50 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [17857]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8922
Joined: 12/24/96
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4968]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 5273
Joined: 6/2/03
|
Re: I asked this question in another thread but figured
2
Mar 24, 2023, 11:31 PM
|
|
Jesus referred to himself as the, "Son of Man". He admitted to his closest disciples that he is the Christ. Take that how you will. I'm sure there's a dozen differing opinions on what that means.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2147]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 2571
Joined: 6/4/22
|
Re: I asked this question in another thread but figured
1
Mar 25, 2023, 2:54 PM
|
|
If you look at the gospels there's definitely an evolution from the earliest writings of Mark to the latest John.
Jesus did not bust out of the gate calling himself god in the flesh.
He did as you say use terms for himself that indicated he was the coming messiah.
Correct me if I'm wrong but the Jews did not believe the messiah would actually be their god Yahweh in the flesh.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29810]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8828
Joined: 10/31/10
|
Re: I asked this question in another thread but figured
1
Mar 25, 2023, 10:52 PM
|
|
>Correct me if I'm wrong but the Jews did not believe the messiah would actually be their god Yahweh in the flesh.
That's correct. Cyrus was one of the first, and probably the most famous. From Isiah 45:1 JUB
"Thus saith the LORD to his Messiah, to Cyrus, whom I have taken by his right hand to subdue Gentiles before him and to loose the loins of kings."
Simon bar Kokhba was another, during a revolt against Rome in about 130 BCE. He was also predicted in scripture. From Numbers 24:7 KJV
"I shall see him, but not now: I shall behold him, but not nigh: there shall come a Star out of Jacob, and a Sceptre shall rise out of Israel, and shall smite the corners of Moab, and destroy all the children of Sheth."
There were other possible messiahs, too. And to my knowledge the Jews did not consider either Cyrus or bar Kokhba to be Yahweh, only a messiah.
From Jewfaq.com, Mashiach: The Messiah
The word "mashiach" does not mean "savior." The notion of an innocent, divine or semi-divine being who will sacrifice himself to save us from the consequences of our own sins is a purely Christian concept that has no basis in Jewish thought.
The mashiach will be a great political leader descended from King David (Jeremiah 23:5). He will be well-versed in Jewish law, and observant of its commandments (Isaiah 11:2-5). He will be a charismatic leader, inspiring others to follow his example. He will be a great military leader, who will win battles for Israel. He will be a great judge, who makes righteous decisions (Jeremiah 33:15). But above all, he will be a human being, not a god, demi-god or other supernatural being.
But the Jews have always been skeptical. An old Jewish story tells of a Russian Jew who was paid a ruble a month by the community to stand at the outskirts of town so that he could be the first person to greet the Messiah upon his arrival. When a friend said to him, “The pay is so low,” the man replied: “True, but the job is permanent.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2147]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 2571
Joined: 6/4/22
|
Re: I asked this question in another thread but figured
1
Mar 26, 2023, 9:17 AM
|
|
Wow great stuff.
ClemsonTiger1988® HuntClub®
What are you thoughts on this?
Mainly the term "messiah" does not mean savior and...
"He will be a great military leader, who will win battles for Israel."
Doesn't this alone eliminate Jesus?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [17857]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8922
Joined: 12/24/96
|
Re: I asked this question in another thread but figured
2
Mar 26, 2023, 4:33 PM
|
|
Why should any of that eliminate Jesus?
And, for the record, This conversation is proving fruitless. Not that I haven't enjoyed it, I have. But, I feel you can use your sources to comfort you better than I can so I will leave to your peaceful, easy feeling and call it a day.
Have a good day.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93604]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95383
Joined: 12/25/09
|
Psa 22.
2
Mar 26, 2023, 9:49 AM
[ in reply to Re: I asked this question in another thread but figured ] |
|
David recorded Jesus on the cross. "They pierced my hands and feet," and "Parted my garments among them and cast lots upon my cloak."
Even Stevie Wonder can see that Chpt 22 was a picture of Jesus on the cross.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2147]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 2571
Joined: 6/4/22
|
Re: Psa 22.
1
Mar 26, 2023, 10:55 AM
|
|
How do Jews interpret this passage? Just curious.
The disciples didn't want to believe Jesus was going to die and like it's been pointed out, were not looking for a suffering messiah.
Fordtunate Son
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [29810]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8828
Joined: 10/31/10
|
Re: Psa 22.
1
Mar 26, 2023, 12:24 PM
|
|
Psalm 22 is very complicated and an incredibly fascinating topic. I'll put something together on it but I'll make it an OP so it doesn't get lost in the mix. Expect LOTS of comments, lol.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93604]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95383
Joined: 12/25/09
|
Do you believe as a practicing Hebrew?
Apr 1, 2023, 5:09 PM
[ in reply to Re: Psa 22. ] |
|
Because if you do then I'm leaving you alone to preach your Jewish message. If you are not a practicing Jew you're just throwing things against the wall to see what stick. In that case I'm bumping you up a notch on my prayer list.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2147]
TigerPulse: 69%
Posts: 2571
Joined: 6/4/22
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [93604]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95383
Joined: 12/25/09
|
Re: Psa 22.
Mar 26, 2023, 6:06 PM
|
|
I found chpt 22 so astounding and profound I memorized it. Often God speaks to me to give me deeper and more complete when I recite it in my mind. It's written on my heart just as God promised.
I can see the desperation when Jesus cries out 'MY GOD, MY GOD, WHY HAST THOU FORSAKEN ME.' I can see when through the misery and torture of hanging on a cross He is still able to declare God Holy.
I can see when He became the object of God's wrath for our sins and realized God was pleased with His destruction.
I can see when He prophesied that a generation of His Jewish kindred would return to God and declare God righteousness for what He did that day at Calvary.
You think I give a rat's rump what anyone else thinks about Psalm 22?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 46
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
