Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,807 Year: 3,064/9,624 Month: 909/1,588 Week: 92/223 Day: 3/17 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Jesus: Why I believe He was a failure.
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 91 of 427 (540801)
12-29-2009 9:02 AM
Reply to: Message 83 by Brian
12-28-2009 7:07 AM


Re: Blind leading the blind
Judaism does not have a spiritual kingdom. Judaism does not teach this, so how can they expect a spiritual kingdom when this concept is not a part of their faith?
Brian why do you think they misunderstood the nature and purpose of the Messiah. They already had a kingdom and a king, the deliver was of a different nature.
Besides all of this I cannot for the life of me understand how a person like yourself that studies Biblical matters can make a comment such as this above. Brian God is spiritual, they believed in God, he was their king, it was therefore a spiritual kingdom. It was always intended by God to be a spirit ruled kingdom. How could a group of people that dealt with a spiritual being as their king not have a spiritual kingdom
The Messiah was the manner and method of forgiveness of sins in the form of God as a king. He was always their king
But, yet again, there is NOTHING in the OT to hint at this. They were promised a physical kingdom and they are still waiting on it.
I just demonstrated it. Besides this from a physical standpoint what would you call the collective people, their borders and territories, regardless of its size
EMA writes: Zechariah 9:9, says he would be king, bringing salvation, but not salvation from physical enemies in the form of the Messiah.
Why not? All I have here is you word for it and it is contrary to what Judaism teaches. Why should I believe you instead of centuries of Jewish thought?
Brian think about it, they already had a king, it was God himself, he discouraged them from having an earthly king and he himself was always the deliverer anyway. You see now your starting to get it. A spiritual God, a Spiritual king. In either instance the Old testament or New, God was essentially the king. Can you remember a time when he did not deliver them. He was the king and they were the kingdom
You seem to be doing very well in reading the mind of God EMA. Again though this claim is not even hinted at in the OT, again all we have is your word that this is what God meant because God cannot tell the Jewish nation exactly what He meant for some reason! Why on Earth would God play these silly games?
But he did Brian. Do you not remember him discouraging them from an earthly king. Besides all of this what were they lacking in God anyway. He discouraged it because they wanted to be like the other nations. He was gently trying to say no fellas that’s not my plan
Do you mean Isa 53 is not descriptive enough on what his intentions were in the Messiah? Nearly all prophecies attributed to the messiah would be understood as a humble servant
Isa 9:6 is about Hezekiah.
Your kidding right? Even the simplest reading would understand it to be about God, even if you didn’t believe it to be about Christ . it certainly can be a reference to Christ, whether you believe it personally or not. Remember the question is not whether I can convince brian of this or that but whether it could be understood as a fulfillment in the Nt writings.
Isa 9:6 is a cross reference to Jeremiah 23:5-6, this is his name whereby he shall be called, THE LORD OUR RIGHTEOUSNESS. Clearly a reference to God and future reference to Christ.
You really are a piece of work. You dismiss almost 3000 years of a nations faith as if it is nothing. You really think that the millions of followers of Judaism are all morons? Not a single one of them actually realised what God was trying to say to them because what God said to them he didn’t really mean!
I really wish you and PaulK would leave your emotions and verbage at the stoop, it does nothing for the discussion and is simply a vulgar way of attempting prejudice against a person or their position.
Think about it Brian. What kind of message do you think he was sending to them in encouraging them to avoid an earthly king. What kind of message do you think he was trying to convey when he said, you don’t need a king, I am your king. Maybe just maybe a spiritual one, I am the God of your fathers
Now watch this, if it is your belief that they never received the physical kingdom as you say, then maybe this is not what he had in mind in the first place. Did you ever think of that?
Now I know the idea of premillinilism suggests that at some point in the future there will be a restoration of Israel in a kingdom form, and my (our) belief is that that restoration is simply through the person and mission of Christ. The lost of Israel or the remnant will be saved through Christ and in Christ in the church which is the kingdom.
But heres the point, Israel ALWAYS HAD A KING and a kingdom, most of the time it was even in some physical form. They always had a deliverer, until such time as they indicated they did not want to abide by Gods laws. Can you remember a time when they weren’t delivered in the Old Testament except when Gods judgement was on them?
And what are you replacing this ancient faith with? Someone who achieved nothing at all that resembles the OT prophecies. What is your justification for that other than circular reasoning?
My justification is that he never intended them to have an earthly king in the first place and the king he desired for them , they rejected in the form of God in the Old Testament and in the form of God in Christ in the NT
You seem unaware that people can lie and invent stories, but the stories that the NT invented would have had an impact on history and this is where we can confirm that Jesus failed. It even solidifies my stance when all we get are apologetics about concepts that are not even Jewish. We get excuses like ‘such and such a verse doesn’t really mean what it says’ and the reinterpretation of that verse is ludicrous.
Im not making anything up out of the OT. God never intended for them to have a physical king and he demonstrates clearly a reference to himself as king in those passages as quoted above and as any thinking person can see a reference to Christ as a spiritual king. Those references could only have reference to God
Don’t you realize that if Jesus was the Messiah then the authors of the NT would not have had to misrepresent the OT on so many occasions? Why do you think the author of Matthew has over 50 prophecies taken out of context from the OT? The NT authors are simply making it up EMA, Jesus failed and they are protecting their own interests. Look at the stories the NT authors tell about Jesus, the miracles, the arrest, the trial, the crucifixion, the resurrection, all unadulterated garbage. Now compare it to the Jewish Messiah, how can there be such a difference? Is God some kind of retard that He cannot tell His people what to expect, how does God get it so wrong? What is the excuse for that? He did tell them but they misunderstood because God told them something that was 100% the opposite of what they were to expect? Jesus H EMA, how obvious does it have to be?
Jesus only failed in your mind, because what you have in mind is not what God ever intended. Its only opposite in your mind because you cannot see that God all along was their King and that king needed to manifest himself in physical form to save them from their sins
It may well do, but Jesus cannot be the one on it. As you and every other xian has failed to do is to establish that bloodline, that fatal flaw. How can you ignore that, are you really so desperate to make this con man into something He wasn’t?
As I stated earlier, I claim to be no expert in this area, but I would point out one simple fact. If so little is known about David, or if he even actually existed, as you indicate at times, how is it that you can be certain of the bloodline you advocate as accurate?
Ah, a little bit convenient that isn’t it considering Jesus failed first time around.
Since a physical kingdom was never a consideration in the form of the Messiah, he could hardly be considered a failure for saving his people from their sins and the entire world
You are reading spiritual because that’s what you NEED to save your failed messiah. You have this crazy notion that Jews were somehow worried about an afterlife, I have no idea where you get this from.
The mere fact that they believed in God, the spirit world, angels, demons, would refute this very silly notion. I am certain that there were groups that believed less or more as the certain in the NT did not believe in the resurrection and others did. Some believed in angels others did not.
Your whitewashing of entire peoples beliefs is simply nonsensical and silly
Here we find the problem. You really are not interested in the truth, this is why you cannot see the obvious. You have already made up your mind that Jesus is the promised Messiah and nothing will ever change that view. I can sympathise. Until you take a step back and try to read the Bible for what it is you will never learn anything about it, it is always going to be this magical document to you. Before I decided examine my faith I found it difficult to take the Bible as anything other than the Truth. But it was only when I truly wanted to discover if my faith had a solid foundation that I found out what a con Christianity actually is. I could not believe I had been so blind. What a relief though when one takes off the blinkers of faith and sees the NT in context. ALL it is really is a collection of propaganda, literature to start off an institution of self preservation. There came a time for me when enough was enough. The excuses were worn very thin. Almost on every occasion that I researched a topic there was no support for the biblical claim, or there was a huge amount of evidence against that claim. Then when I kept hearing stuff like ‘well Jesus didn’t do that yet, but He will in the future’, or ‘you cannot understand this or that without the guidance of the holy spirit’, there then comes a point when it is blatantly obvious that Christianity is a piss take. Who can be happy following something that makes no sense at all, is rife with internal contradictions, full of logical errors, strewn with historical inaccuracies, and comes with a book full of myths, legends, and folk tales that contradict science, I certainly don’t want to live a life like that. It is a life of ignorance and fear.
And here we find a problem that is deeper than any objectivity or rational treatment if items. This is what I meant earlier, such aggressive behavior and willingness to find truth in the Old when it suits your purposes, then in almost the same breath decry it (the New)as a magical document with nearly no merit. Such extremes.
Please brian, such arrogance do you think you are the only person that ever did any objective and detailed studies of these matters? Are you comparing yourself for example to men like F. F. Bruce and thousands of other very skilled Biblical scholars, that came away believing in the very thing you oppose.
Give it a rest, it has no place in the discussion and your prejudices are obvious. Give it a rest
Well I haven’t met any Jew that thinks Judaism teaches a spiritual kingdom for the messiah.
Then you need to get out more. Simply turn on your television and listen to any messianic Jew, that is now a convert of Christ. I can recommend some books
EAM writes: can you not see the simple point, that for you to claim that jesus was a failure because he did not fulfill a single prophecy and you use as your source some unreliable Old testament books, as you claim they are, is both contradictory and nonsensical.
I have no idea what you are on about here. My source, the OT, is different from your source, the NT. There is nothing contradictory at all. If the OT says that the Messiah will be a king of Israel and the NT says Jesus wasn’t, then where am I contradicting myself?
He did say he was a king and a king of the Jews
One thing is certain though, Jesus did not sit on it so we can comfortably reject Him as the Messiah promised in the OT.
Your looking for the wrong type of kingdom. Here is a simple question.
Why do you think the Israelites rejected God as a king and requested a physical one?
He never intended them to have a physical king, even though they eventually obtained one. This was one by God to demonstrate exacally why they didn’t need one. Except for a few most of them were wicked beyond belief. The need for God to be king was obvious
But the thing with historical research is that all of it is simply degrees of plausibility. 3 million people in the Exodus group, historically impossible and has been shown to be untrue. A king descended from David is completely plausible there is nothing fantastic about it. Do you see the difference? We cannot reject an entire collection of texts just because much of it has been shown to be untrue, that’s just silly. It’s like saying that just because Joshua and his armies did not conquer Jericho then there was no such city as Jericho! History is about degrees of truth, and your sources need to be examined individually.
But that’s the point Brian many of your contentions of unreliability have been demonstrated to not be implausible, when other information is offered. But the fact that God never intended the Israelites to have physical king and that the Messiah need not be a physical king, is simply to easy to demonstrate
So we dismiss my argument that we can discover through history whether Jesus was a king or not? He wasn’t king of this realm then He must be king of another? Can you see how childish this is? Xianity really can be torn apart with the most superficial of enquiries.
You speak as if you have considered all the interpretations from the Old testament and have considered your conclusions as absolute as in the case of Isa 9:6-7 and Jer 23:5-7, which are a clear reference to God himself and very little doubt to Christ in the form of God. or atleast it can be easily seen that christ could be that fulfillment
Which, if any king of Israel before the Messiah was described as saving his people from thier sins, A Mighty God, eternal father? does that sound spiritual to you?
But sin in the OT is not the same as sin in the NT. There are a variety of definitions for sin. People can save themselves from sin in the OT.
Please provide a rfernce for this idea, if you will please
No it doesn’t. I’ve already explained this reference, it is referring to the nation of Israel and your repetition of spiritual kingdom does not affect what that reference is saying. Keep repeating your claim though, you might talk yourself into it.
Only the worst form of interpretation would declare that Isa 53 has refernce to Israel only, even the simplest reader can see it is a reference to God himself and it is a clear discription of Christ as God in the NT. Both here and jeremiah the reference is clearly, to through and about God
Of course it won’t be found in history because Jesus failed to establish the Jewish messianic kingdom, and since He failed we do need some excuse for Him don’t we? Tell you what, let’s invent a spiritual kingdom then that way no one can prove us wrong (again).
Until you can demonstrate either in the Old or the New that God intended them to have a king in a physical form from the beginning and that this was not his wishes and until you can demonstrate that god was not thier king and deliverer and until you can demonstrate that any king could deliever them from thier sins other than God and until you can show in any passage where God alludes to a man as those things described in Isa 53 and Jeremiah 23, you have failed in your task to demonstrate that christ is not the fulfillment of such passages, or atleast that he could not be described as such.
When you understand this simple point then you will understand the nature of Christ as the Messiah and the fulfillment to those prophecies. That simple point is that HE NEVER INTENDED THEM TO HAVE AN EARTHLY KING, from the beginning.
EAM
Edited by EMA, : No reason given.
Edited by EMA, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by Brian, posted 12-28-2009 7:07 AM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by Phat, posted 12-29-2009 11:14 AM Dawn Bertot has replied
 Message 94 by Brian, posted 12-30-2009 5:51 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 92 of 427 (540818)
12-29-2009 11:14 AM
Reply to: Message 91 by Dawn Bertot
12-29-2009 9:02 AM


Re: Blind leading the blind
EMA writes:
God never intended for them to have a physical king and he demonstrates clearly a reference to himself as king in those passages as quoted above and as any thinking person can see a reference to Christ as a spiritual king.
Just a quick comment. Recently I read a book on the Science of Thinking. Some of the observations were:
quote:
I mean the kind of thinking that is forced on us when we are deciding on a course to pursue, on a life work to take up perhaps; the kind of thinking that was forced on us in our younger days when we had to find a solution to a problem in mathematics, or when we tackled psychology in college. I do not mean " thinking in snatches", or holding petty opinions on this subject and on that. I mean thought on significant questions which lie outside the bounds of your narrow personal welfare.
In order to approach a subject rationally, it is often better to disassociate what you want it to say versus what it actually says.
quote:
Modern psychologists tell us that all reasoning begins in perplexity, hesitation, doubt. "The process of reasoning is one of problem solving. . . . The occasion for the reasoning is always a thwarted purpose.'' It is essential we keep this in mind. It differs from the popular conception even more
than may appear at first sight. If a ma/n were to know everything he could not think. Nothing would ever puzzle him, his purposes would never be thwarted, he would never experience perplexity or doubt, he would have no problems.
If we are to conceive of God as an All-Knower, we cannot conceive of Him as a Thinking Being. Thinking is reserved for beings of finite intelligence. Were we to study the origin and evolution of thinking, we would doubtless find that thinking arose in just this wayfrom thwarted purposes. If our lives and the lives of our animal ancestors had always run smoothly, if our every desire were immediately satisfied, if we never met an obstacle in anything we tried to do,
thinking would never have appeared on this planet.
so I ask:
  • How can you have it in your mind what "God intended"? Really. Tell me. Don't tell me that the Spirit of the Lord within you knows the answers. That is not fair nor rational.
  • Why are you trying to get Brian to agree with you? What makes you so certain that the way you see an issue is the right answer?

  • This message is a reply to:
     Message 91 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-29-2009 9:02 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 93 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-29-2009 1:25 PM Phat has not replied

      
    Dawn Bertot
    Member
    Posts: 3571
    Joined: 11-23-2007


    Message 93 of 427 (540842)
    12-29-2009 1:25 PM
    Reply to: Message 92 by Phat
    12-29-2009 11:14 AM


    Re: Blind leading the blind
    so I ask:
    How can you have it in your mind what "God intended"? Really. Tell me. Don't tell me that the Spirit of the Lord within you knows the answers. That is not fair nor rational.
    Why are you trying to get Brian to agree with you? What makes you so certain that the way you see an issue is the right answer?
    Interesting point you and your author make here. however, i would suggest that you take the issues at hand, or take a quick read of the Old and New testaments, then ask yourself whether God intended this or that thing.
    I dont need any direct operation of the Holy Spirit, directly on myself, even thought that would be wonderful, because his intentions are already there in black and white, if you will.
    Besides this what is this issue you fellas seem to have, ascribing tendencies to other individuals and ignoring them in yourselves. brian has been very dogmatic concerining his positions and interpretations, yet you ignore this tendancy in this connection, and point it out in myself, like I am the only person with a strong opinion. Perhaps theres a book that can explain your behavior
    How can you have it in your mind what "God intended"? Really. Tell me.
    I have a belief in an actual God that interacts in his creation. I also believe the Apostles and NT writers to be inspired by that same God. they give us the mind of God.
    I Cor chapter 2. heres the whole plan and mind of God in a few cerses according to an Apostle that claims inspiration
    "1And I, when I came to you, brothers,[a](A) did not come proclaiming to you(B) the testimony[b] of God with lofty speech or wisdom. 2For I decided to know nothing among you except(C) Jesus Christ and him crucified. 3And(D) I was with you(E) in weakness and in fear and much trembling, 4and my speech and my message were not in plausible words of wisdom, but in demonstration of(F) the Spirit and of power, 5that your faith might not rest in the wisdom of men but(G) in the power of God.
    Wisdom from the Spirit
    6Yet among(H) the mature we do impart wisdom, although it is not(I) a wisdom of this age or of the rulers of this age,(J) who are doomed to pass away. 7But we impart a secret and hidden wisdom of God,(K) which God decreed before the ages for our glory. 8None of(L) the rulers of this age understood this, for(M) if they had, they would not have crucified(N) the Lord of glory. 9But, as it is written,
    (O) "What no eye has seen, nor ear heard,
    nor the heart of man imagined,
    what God has(P) prepared(Q) for those who love him"
    10these things(R) God has revealed to us through the Spirit. For the Spirit searches everything, even(S) the depths of God. 11For who knows a person’s thoughts(T) except the spirit of that person, which is in him? So also no one comprehends the thoughts of God except the Spirit of God. 12Now(U) we have received not(V) the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might understand the things freely given us by God. 13And we impart this(W) in words not taught by human wisdom but taught by the Spirit,(X) interpreting spiritual truths to those who are spiritual.[c]
    14The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are(Y) folly to him, and(Z) he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned. 15The(AA) spiritual person judges all things, but is himself to be judged by no one. 16(AB) "For who has understood the mind of the Lord so as to instruct him?" But(AC) we have the mind of Christ."
    I would have no idea probably what the old testament writers may have been conveying DIRECTLY, but the same God that direct the Old directed the New, so I have a glance into what was intended BEFORE THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD.
    I am only presenting a point of view, if you dont like it, take up the issue
    EAM
    Edited by EMA, : No reason given.
    Edited by EMA, : No reason given.
    Edited by EMA, : No reason given.
    Edited by EMA, : No reason given.
    Edited by EMA, : No reason given.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 92 by Phat, posted 12-29-2009 11:14 AM Phat has not replied

      
    Brian
    Member (Idle past 4959 days)
    Posts: 4659
    From: Scotland
    Joined: 10-22-2002


    Message 94 of 427 (540923)
    12-30-2009 5:51 AM
    Reply to: Message 91 by Dawn Bertot
    12-29-2009 9:02 AM


    Getting nowhere
    Brian why do you think they misunderstood the nature and purpose of the Messiah.
    But they didn't, and they still don't.
    This is going nowhere.
    So, a wee update.
    Brian's reasons for seeing Jesus as a failure.
    1. No Davidic bloodline. No challenge to this claim
    2. Jesus was not anointed as King Of Israel. The main challenge is that Jesus was a king, but of some spiritual kingdom which was not what the Jews were expecting. A bit too convenient as this claim cannot be verified.
    3. The Messiah would free Israel from her oppressors. Jesus did not free Israel from anyone, in fact israel more oppressed after Jesus died. This point still stands
    4. The Messiah would gather the nation of Israel back to Israel. The exact opposite happened after Jesus died! My point still stands.
    5. The messiah would rebuild the Temple on Temple Mount. Jesus obviously did not achieve this as the Temple stood all through Jesus' life and was destroyed a few decades after Jesus died. My point still stands.
    6. The Messiah will bring world peace! Has the world ever been in such a state of war and terror? Jesus failed here too. My point stands.
    7. Not single messianic prophecy can be verified in the person of Jesus. My point still stands.
    7 points, and the best excuses we have for any of them is that the jewish nation cannot understand their own scriptures and that Jesus is king of some unverifiable kingdom.
    So, these are my reasons for proclaiming Jesus as a failure, I was asked and I gave them. Nothing at all in this thread so far to make me reconsider anything, in fact most of the posts have just reassured me that I am correct.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 91 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-29-2009 9:02 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 95 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-30-2009 9:41 AM Brian has replied
     Message 106 by Peg, posted 01-02-2010 7:57 AM Brian has replied

      
    Dawn Bertot
    Member
    Posts: 3571
    Joined: 11-23-2007


    Message 95 of 427 (540954)
    12-30-2009 9:41 AM
    Reply to: Message 94 by Brian
    12-30-2009 5:51 AM


    Re: Getting nowhere
    But they didn't, and they still don't.
    This is going nowhere.
    I disagree. you have paid not a single bit of attention to the fact that I demonstrated God never intended them to have a physical king, becuae he was thier king. he only gave them a king to demonstrate that they didnt need a king and nearly every king was wicked and unruley.
    As a matter of fact there is no reason to believe that God EVER intended Israel to have a physical king THROUHOUT, history other than himself. he then demonstrates this point AGAIN (as he did in the Old testament), in the nature and purpose of Christ
    1 Sam 8:7 "And the Lord said to Samuel, "Heed the voice of the people in all that they say to you; for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected Me, that I should not reign over them.
    It is irrelevant what Israel as a people expected, because God had already explained the principle of a king. and they misunderstood that. there is no reason to expect they would understand the nature of his purposes in the Messiah, if they did not understand anything else. Do you see whats going on there Brian. He then demonstrated in the Old Testament passages that I indicated, that he is clearly talking about HIMSELF, describing himself, by terms such as, Mighty God Eteranal Father, etc. What thinking person would attribute these passages to any single man, especially the Isralites, given there very respectful nature twords God
    1. No Davidic bloodline. No challenge to this claim
    here i agreed I am no expert, but if inspiration is involved, and there is controversy as to the specific details by authorites on this matter, there is no reason to reject what is offered by Matt and the other Gospel writers as absolutley false
    2. Jesus was not anointed as King Of Israel. The main challenge is that Jesus was a king, but of some spiritual kingdom which was not what the Jews were expecting. A bit too convenient as this claim cannot be verified.
    but it can be verified by jesus' own words and the way God is represented in the Old test passages I cited. Your only contention to this is that the Jews needed to understand this or that. Most of the time they did not
    3. The Messiah would free Israel from her oppressors. Jesus did not free Israel from anyone, in fact israel more oppressed after Jesus died. This point still stands
    I asked you the direct question if GOD HIMSELF, (see the point Brian) did not deliver them in most if not all those situations back there, unless he was punishing them, AND HE DID. Today from a physical standpoint they are out of Gods physical perview, except through Christ. The Messiah was to deliver his people from the oppession of sin, ie, "he would save his people from thier sins
    4. The Messiah would gather the nation of Israel back to Israel. The exact opposite happened after Jesus died! My point still stands.
    He is and still does gather the remnant of Israel, through Christ in the Chruch or Kingdom, Col 1:13. this what was meant in the Messiah, whether it was understood or not.
    As I stated earlier, prophecy was not the all in all for proof of the Messiahship. Jesus said, "if you dont believe me for the words that I speak, believe me for the WORKS that I do, because they testify of me. understanding all the prophecies was not a requirement, believing in the Christ was
    5. The messiah would rebuild the Temple on Temple Mount. Jesus obviously did not achieve this as the Temple stood all through Jesus' life and was destroyed a few decades after Jesus died. My point still stands.
    jesus made it very clear to the women at the well, that the time was coming that men would not worship God in jeruselum or some other place but in the hearts of men.
    The temple spoken of in the messiah was his body and the hearts of men as temples
    "destroy this temple and I will raise it up in three days, but this spake he of his body". he rebuilt a temple that was not physical specifically and was eternal in nature
    6. The Messiah will bring world peace! Has the world ever been in such a state of war and terror? Jesus failed here too. My point stands.
    jesus stated, "I bring peace not as the world brings peace". jesus or the Messiah brought peace in a world sense in the hearts and minds of people, atleast he has given the world a way to live in peace with men and MORE SPECIFICALLY WITH GOD.
    Now listen again Brian and dont make the same mistake like that of old. God is spiritual, God is eternal, it stands to reason his purposes are spiritual and eternal in character. Are you still with me? God IS and only ever has or will be the king of Israel and the world, whether they accept him or understand him.
    Your goal here would be to demonstrate this otherwise, but how will you since God has already made it clear, he only wished to be there king. This then fits perfectly with what is wriiten of and about Christ in the nature of God and the messiah
    7. Not single messianic prophecy can be verified in the person of Jesus. My point still stands.
    As you can see you are wrong, because like the people of old you misuderstood Gods purpose from the start.
    again, now listen carefully, God only wanted himself as a king of Israel and eventually the world.
    christ meets and fulfills every prophecy, if the are understood from Gods ORIGINAL INTENTIONS
    Edited by EMA, : No reason given.
    Edited by EMA, : No reason given.
    Edited by EMA, : No reason given.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 94 by Brian, posted 12-30-2009 5:51 AM Brian has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 96 by Brian, posted 12-30-2009 2:05 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

      
    Brian
    Member (Idle past 4959 days)
    Posts: 4659
    From: Scotland
    Joined: 10-22-2002


    Message 96 of 427 (540998)
    12-30-2009 2:05 PM
    Reply to: Message 95 by Dawn Bertot
    12-30-2009 9:41 AM


    Re: Getting nowhere
    here i agreed I am no expert, but if inspiration is involved, and there is controversy as to the specific details by authorites on this matter, there is no reason to reject what is offered by Matt and the other Gospel writers as absolutley false
    You see EMA this is where I completely lose interest, and hopefully you will understand why.
    Now right away we have to agree that you will never be persuaded that Jesus was not the Messiah regardless of how much evidence is shown to you. You agree that you do not know of a bloodline to David for Jesus yet this makes no difference to you, you look for all other possibilities to link Him to David even though you know of none. You are clutching at straws here EMA, and I am not wasting any more of my time.
    Don’t you see that this approach is as bad as the creation ‘scientists’? You have already concluded that Jesus was the Messiah, and even when you acknowledge that you know of no way to link Jesus to David you are happy to accept that there MUST be some way to do it! If you cannot establish a bloodline to David then why not just stop there, why bother with the contortions to make Jesus fit the OT messiah? He failed at the first hurdle. If Jesus did not have a human father then He could not be the Messiah, how obvious does this have to be?
    You are even looking to ‘inspiration’ as a way of solving this problem! Why? If we are going down that road then again the discussion is pointless.
    But I’m getting off the point. I have been on this merry-go-round many times and I am not prepared to do so again. I have a great deal of work here to do and I am not wasting time batting scriptures back and forward. The events involving the Messiah would have a direct impact on history, it would be easy to see when the Messiah lived, and he clearly hasn’t yet, I doubt he ever will.
    You asked my reasons for concluding that Jesus was a failure and I have given some of them, and to me it is perfectly clear that He failed, and nothing here has made any difference to my stance.
    Edited by Brian, : grammar

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 95 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-30-2009 9:41 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 97 by Iblis, posted 12-30-2009 2:24 PM Brian has not replied
     Message 102 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-30-2009 10:03 PM Brian has not replied

      
    Iblis
    Member (Idle past 3895 days)
    Posts: 663
    Joined: 11-17-2005


    Message 97 of 427 (540999)
    12-30-2009 2:24 PM
    Reply to: Message 96 by Brian
    12-30-2009 2:05 PM


    Re: Getting nowhere
    Are we done then? At least with this round?
    Let's count up the current score on both sides
    First place
    Brian, arguing Jesus is a failure: excellent documentation, compelling construction;
    Buzsaw, arguing he just isn't done yet: also very good documentation, appeal to scientific method
    Second place
    PaulK, arguing that he is "largely obscured" by euhemeristic myth: extremely good documentation, persistence in the face of adversity;
    slevesque, arguing he is misunderstood: not so great with the texts, but introduces some interesting resources
    Third place
    Jazzns, arguing that he is confusing: also low on text, but good comments and questions;
    Son Goku, switching sides to argue that he is one Being but three Persons, so the two genealogies aren't a problem
    Honorable mentions
    purpledawn, arguing that he is satirized;
    hooah212002, switching sides to argue that he isn't so much a failure as a bastard
    Darwin awards
    Barabbas126, for introducing a totally unsupported conspiracy theory, which is nevertheless charming enough to make me break character;
    the top poster, for flooding, begging the question, appealing to authority, arguing ad hominem, and "willfully choosing to believe a lie." (Damn I miss Ray.)
    Edited by Iblis, : ten dollar word added
    Edited by Iblis, : added qualifiers and a suffix

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 96 by Brian, posted 12-30-2009 2:05 PM Brian has not replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 98 by hooah212002, posted 12-30-2009 2:30 PM Iblis has not replied
     Message 99 by PaulK, posted 12-30-2009 2:35 PM Iblis has replied
     Message 103 by purpledawn, posted 12-31-2009 7:11 AM Iblis has not replied
     Message 104 by Son Goku, posted 01-01-2010 1:35 PM Iblis has not replied

      
    hooah212002
    Member (Idle past 801 days)
    Posts: 3193
    Joined: 08-12-2009


    Message 98 of 427 (541001)
    12-30-2009 2:30 PM
    Reply to: Message 97 by Iblis
    12-30-2009 2:24 PM


    Re: Getting nowhere
    Honorable mentions
    purpledawn, arguing that he is satire;
    hooah212002, switching sides to argue that he isn't so much a failure as a bastard
    At first glance, I thought you called ME a failure and a bastard. I was 2 seconds away from typing up a venomous, curse word laiden post in response.

    Who are we? We find that we live on an insignificant planet of a humdrum star lost in a galaxy tucked away in some forgotten corner of a universe in which there are far more galaxies than people
    -Carl Sagan
    For me, it is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.
    -Carl Sagan

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 97 by Iblis, posted 12-30-2009 2:24 PM Iblis has not replied

      
    PaulK
    Member
    Posts: 17822
    Joined: 01-10-2003
    Member Rating: 2.2


    Message 99 of 427 (541002)
    12-30-2009 2:35 PM
    Reply to: Message 97 by Iblis
    12-30-2009 2:24 PM


    Re: Getting nowhere
    You've got my position wrong. I don't believe the genealogies or either of the conflicting Nativity accounts (and much of that in Matthew is pretty obviously legendary) but I don't go so far as to argue that there wasn't a person behind the stories.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 97 by Iblis, posted 12-30-2009 2:24 PM Iblis has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 100 by Iblis, posted 12-30-2009 2:41 PM PaulK has replied

      
    Iblis
    Member (Idle past 3895 days)
    Posts: 663
    Joined: 11-17-2005


    Message 100 of 427 (541003)
    12-30-2009 2:41 PM
    Reply to: Message 99 by PaulK
    12-30-2009 2:35 PM


    Re: Getting nowhere
    You've got my position wrong.
    Corrected.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 99 by PaulK, posted 12-30-2009 2:35 PM PaulK has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 101 by PaulK, posted 12-30-2009 3:09 PM Iblis has not replied

      
    PaulK
    Member
    Posts: 17822
    Joined: 01-10-2003
    Member Rating: 2.2


    Message 101 of 427 (541005)
    12-30-2009 3:09 PM
    Reply to: Message 100 by Iblis
    12-30-2009 2:41 PM


    Re: Getting nowhere
    That's still a bit of an exaggeration - especially since a "euhemeristic myth" could refer to a mythical person based on a god (the prologue to Snorri Sturlusson's Edda contains some likely examples).
    Describing Jesus as "a man, largely obscured by legend" would come closer to my views.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 100 by Iblis, posted 12-30-2009 2:41 PM Iblis has not replied

      
    Dawn Bertot
    Member
    Posts: 3571
    Joined: 11-23-2007


    Message 102 of 427 (541052)
    12-30-2009 10:03 PM
    Reply to: Message 96 by Brian
    12-30-2009 2:05 PM


    Re: Getting nowhere
    You see EMA this is where I completely lose interest, and hopefully you will understand why.
    Now right away we have to agree that you will never be persuaded that Jesus was not the Messiah regardless of how much evidence is shown to you. You agree that you do not know of a bloodline to David for Jesus yet this makes no difference to you, you look for all other possibilities to link Him to David even though you know of none. You are clutching at straws here EMA, and I am not wasting any more of my time
    well ofcourse you lost intrest because it is the only thing you have chosen to address, in any fashion. youve totally ignored any thing else that has been brought up,. Gods intentions that they never have an earthly king, passages that clearly could not refer to men, but God the concept of dual usages of prophetic prediction, God as a spiritual being with eternal spiritual purposes as indicated in both testaments, Israels failure to understand Gods purposes and many other things I have demonstrated during this discussion, you have simply set aside as not applicable, when good debate would require that you atleast address them in some form. Nice form Brian
    not being an expert myself I certainly can understand the information of others to demonstrate that alleged contradictions are not always onesided in your favor as you try and make it appear, through verbage and intimidation. Men of scholarship did not believe these things in vain, nor did they leave to speculation or chance
    this writer points out after a very comprehensive examination
    "How clear! How plain! In a very real sense, rather than disproving the Messianic credentials of Yeshua Ha Moshiach -- Jesus Christ -- as the Saviour and Redeemer of all mankind, these alleged discrepancies, when thoroughly studied, add powerful proof and convincing evidence that Jesus was indeed all that He claimed to be -- the One destined to rule upon the Throne of David, as our Messiah and King" William F Dankenbring
    Here is the article in its entirity, which demonstrates once again your sphere of influnece in these matters is limited to your own opinions and are not as absolute as you might think
    http://www.triumphpro.com/genealogy-of-christ.htm
    the fact that you have ignored that the Bible is a book about and for God, yet ignore with a wave of the hand, inspiration in the mix, to understand possible explanations in the area of prophecy, shows you are not objective
    the fact that you have ignored the principle of internal interpretation of both testaments to explain fulfillment of prophecy
    Last but not least you categorical wave of the hand debating method for the very real demonstrable nature of a spiritual kingdom in both testaments to which I clearly (or the scriptures) point. Again brian, nice form
    Don’t you see that this approach is as bad as the creation ‘scientists’? You have already concluded that Jesus was the Messiah, and even when you acknowledge that you know of no way to link Jesus to David you are happy to accept that there MUST be some way to do it! If you cannot establish a bloodline to David then why not just stop there, why bother with the contortions to make Jesus fit the OT messiah? He failed at the first hurdle
    thanks for putting words in my mouth. i never said there wasnt a way to link him, I simply said yours was not the only arguments or approach
    you seem to believe yours is the only information in this area and that it cannot be argued or questioned in any fashion. have we closed the book on CREATION SCIENCE because some people believe a certain method or approach is the only one. has any one proven that the TOE is absolutley 100%, with no possibilites that creation science is not true.
    Such arrogance is truley bad FORM brian
    You are even looking to ‘inspiration’ as a way of solving this problem! Why? If we are going down that road then again the discussion is pointless.
    You arrogant pompous clown, when was inspiration never a consideration in a book about a spiritual being and why should it be pointless. if it is simply PROVE that it did not take place.
    Bad form Captain H
    But I’m getting off the point. I have been on this merry-go-round many times and I am not prepared to do so again. I have a great deal of work here to do and I am not wasting time batting scriptures back and forward. The events involving the Messiah would have a direct impact on history, it would be easy to see when the Messiah lived, and he clearly hasn’t yet, I doubt he ever will.
    Brain my simple friend, batting scriptures back and forth is ONE of the very pointS of bible study. you would have been better off dealing with any of the point I brought up verses bashing me personally as a means of intimidation, as is characteristics of you fellas here. You use it as a form of debate and intimidation, hoping that your opponent will ignore that you responded to nearly nothing you brought up
    bad form brian, very bad form
    The events involving the Messiah would have a direct impact on history, it would be easy to see when the Messiah lived, and he clearly hasn’t yet, I doubt he ever will.
    This IS probably one of the most ignorant, completley stupid statments I have ever heard. Please tell me who you believe has had more impact in History than Jesus Christ the Messiah? You have just demonstrated the point that he was not a failure, thank you
    EAM
    Edited by EMA, : No reason given.
    Edited by EMA, : No reason given.
    Edited by EMA, : No reason given.
    Edited by EMA, : No reason given.
    Edited by EMA, : No reason given.
    Edited by EMA, : No reason given.
    Edited by EMA, : No reason given.
    Edited by EMA, : No reason given.
    Edited by EMA, : No reason given.
    Edited by EMA, : No reason given.
    Edited by EMA, : No reason given.

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 96 by Brian, posted 12-30-2009 2:05 PM Brian has not replied

      
    purpledawn
    Member (Idle past 3457 days)
    Posts: 4453
    From: Indiana
    Joined: 04-25-2004


    Message 103 of 427 (541077)
    12-31-2009 7:11 AM
    Reply to: Message 97 by Iblis
    12-30-2009 2:24 PM


    Re: Getting nowhere
    quote:
    purpledawn, arguing that he is satire;
    Actually my point was that the book of Matthew was written as a satire, not that Jesus is satire.
    IOW, the double prophecy bits weren't supposed to be taken seriously. The writer was making fun of the messianic prophecy gymnastics of the time using the book of Mark. The first "prophecy" supposedly fulfilled in Mark is a concoction from Malachi and Isaiah.
    I don't see that the OT prophecies that were truly referring to a messiah fit what we know of Jesus.
    I've been reading the thread and hoping someone would make a reasonable counter argument, but alas; I am disappointed.

    Scripture is like Newton’s third law of motionfor every action there is an equal and opposite reaction.
    In other words, for every biblical directive that exists, there is another scriptural mandate challenging it.
    -- Carlene Cross in The Bible and Newton’s Third Law of Motion

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 97 by Iblis, posted 12-30-2009 2:24 PM Iblis has not replied

      
    Son Goku
    Inactive Member


    Message 104 of 427 (541204)
    01-01-2010 1:35 PM
    Reply to: Message 97 by Iblis
    12-30-2009 2:24 PM


    Re: Getting nowhere
    Iblis writes:
    Son Goku, switching sides to argue that he is one Being but three Persons, so the two genealogies aren't a problem
    Well, actually, it is more complicated than that.
    In Christian theology God is one being with three personhoods, the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.
    The personhood known as the Son has two natures:
    (a) The divine nature, the Son who resides in eternity with the father
    (b) The fully human Jesus of Nazereth, who has a temporal existence.
    So that's:
    One being.
    Three persons.
    One of the persons has two natures.
    Since Jesus is fully human he may claim descent from David through Joseph.
    This view is Chalcedonian Christianity and includes virtually all modern western churches.
    I should also say that the two natures of Jesus have two separate wills. Which is how Jesus could suffer, even though he was the fully divine "Son".

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 97 by Iblis, posted 12-30-2009 2:24 PM Iblis has not replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 105 by Brian, posted 01-02-2010 4:40 AM Son Goku has replied

      
    Brian
    Member (Idle past 4959 days)
    Posts: 4659
    From: Scotland
    Joined: 10-22-2002


    Message 105 of 427 (541275)
    01-02-2010 4:40 AM
    Reply to: Message 104 by Son Goku
    01-01-2010 1:35 PM


    Re: Getting nowhere
    Since Jesus is fully human he may claim descent from David through Joseph.
    How can He claim descent from David through Joseph if Joseph had nothing to do with His conception?

    This message is a reply to:
     Message 104 by Son Goku, posted 01-01-2010 1:35 PM Son Goku has replied

    Replies to this message:
     Message 107 by Peg, posted 01-02-2010 8:08 AM Brian has not replied
     Message 108 by Son Goku, posted 01-02-2010 8:21 AM Brian has replied

      
    Newer Topic | Older Topic
    Jump to:


    Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

    ™ Version 4.2
    Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024