|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Summations Only | Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Scriptural evidence that Jesus is Messiah: | |||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 425 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
I have already done that Dawn, in the thread I have pointed you towards several times. We looked at what the New Testament writers claimed and then looked at the full context of their quote mines and in every case we found that they misrepresented what had actually been written.
AbE: Also you keep claiming that I use "I just don't like it" as a reason or argument. Unless you can provide a link to a post where I used that argument it is just another example of your misrepresentation and posting falsehoods. Edited by jar, : see AbE;Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3744 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
Dawn Bertot writes:
Well, that is obviously what you believe. However, it does not matter the approach or interpretation one gives the interpretationYou don't actually care what the bible says: you have already decided what it means, regardless of what is actually written. But other people prefer to be accurate in their interpretation. Dawn Bertot writes:
But he was not a king with any government. If you choose to believe the interpretation provided by the quote, then he passes that test as well "You are a king, then!" said Pilate. Jesus answered, "You are right in saying I am a king. In fact, for this reason I was born, and for this I came into the world, to testify to the truth. Everyone on the side of truth listens to me."He is saying that he is the king of the Jews - but that has no connection to having the the government on his shoulders - it is just him claiming that he is king of the jews. (And I am fairly sure that Jews would not consider him their king.) What you have done there is seen the word 'king' in a sentence and jumped to the conclusion that "king=government".But that is childishly simplistic and wrong. Jesus was not persecuted by the government and nor was he part of the government.Your prophecy is unfulfilled. It doesn't support Jesus being the messiah. Dawn Bertot writes:
And that is you disingenuously shifting the burden of proof. Instead of nitpicking each prophecy, it would be more benificial to try and show why he is not the messiah overall. The above prophecy is refuted.The burden of proof is yours. We can move on to your other evidence, if you have any. Edited by Panda, : No reason given. Edited by Panda, : No reason given. Edited by Panda, : No reason given.Tradition and heritage are all dead people's baggage. Stop carrying it!
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Dawn Bertot Member (Idle past 114 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: |
I have already done that Dawn, in the thread I have pointed you towards several times. We looked at what the New Testament writers claimed and then looked at the full context of their quote mines and in every case we found that they misrepresented what had actually been written. Ill make this simple so even you can understand this Jar. Ha Ha, just a little jibe there Jar. Anywho, you do understand this thread is not that thread, correct, but you seem to be participating in this thread. So why not do one of two things, or both. Present new material here or drag what you think is releveant here. That way you could actually make a formal argument. You do remember how to set out an argument, correct? IOWs, show me how IN THIS THREAD, that is, this thread, that is not the other one, how they, the NT writers, misrepresented what was actually written
Also you keep claiming that I use "I just don't like it" as a reason or argument. By this I mean you have neither presented or responded in argument form to anything I have presented The closest you came was to ask a question, on how and when Jesus sat on Davids throne. Now, while that is a very good question, you understand thats not an argument, correct? Everything else you have presented IN THIS THREAD, is tantamount to "I just dont like it" Wouldnt you agree? If I am wrong in my estimation, point to the argument you made, that is not name calling of the NT writers or claiming without support they were quote miners If I have missed some actual argument you made, show it to me. referencing another thread is not actual evidence Dawn Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given. Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given. Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given. Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Dawn Bertot Member (Idle past 114 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: |
Well, that is obviously what you believe. You don't actually care what the bible says: you have already decided what it means, regardless of what is actually written. But other people prefer to be accurate in their interpretation. Really. And by accuracy you mean, accepting what the OT writers were saying as actual fact and rejecting what the NT writers were saying outright and without any supporting evidence You mean that kind of accuracy? Would you and Bart Erdman be ACCURATE, if you accepted the OT writers claim to inspiration directly from God? The problem with the OTHER PEOPLE as you describe them, is that they want to incorperate what suits thier purposes in the context and reject what does not suit thier ideology., ie miracles and claims to inspiration by the writers They do this without any justification, then with the same breath insist the NT writers must be wrong because they discuss miracles and the such like You can only have a consistant interpretation if you are willing to involve all the writers comments When God and actually God and inspiration are involved, it is clear Christ was the fulfillment
But he was not a king with any government. He is saying that he is the king of the Jews - but that has no connection to having the the government on his shoulders - it is just him claiming that he is king of the jews. (And I am fairly sure that Jews would not consider him their king.) What you have done there is seen the word 'king' in a sentence and jumped to the conclusion that "king=government". But that is childishly simplistic and wrong. Really. So how did you come to the conclusion that goverment must mean a earthy kingdom? Let me guess, because in your view God, heaven and heavenly places dont actually exist, correct? Jesus said, "all authority has been given me in heaven and earth" Id say that was a pretty good governing area, wouldnt you? If he is Lord of Lords and king of kings, who does that leave to govern? What does that leave to govern?
Jesus was not persecuted by the government and nor was he part of the government. Your prophecy is unfulfilled. It doesn't support Jesus being the messiah. Im not sure if you are serious in your statements or not. However, I will proceed as if you are Since I have now established he was the government of all governments, all thats left is, was he persecuted by the government? The jewish leaders were under the authority of the Roman government., ie Herod, the jewish leaders The jewish leaders and the Roman government sentenced him to death If that is the interpretation, then Id say that was having someone on thier back (shoulder)
And that is you disingenuously shifting the burden of proof. The above prophecy is refuted. The burden of proof is yours. We can move on to your other evidence, if you have any. How does the statement Lord of Lords and king of kings suit you for evidence?
The above prophecy is refuted. It is because of these kinds of statements, that I cannot know whether you are actually serious, or just being silly on purpose. If you are not, then I apologize Dawn Bertot Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given. Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given. Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3744 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
Dawn Bertot writes:
You have not established that. Since I have now established he was the government of all governments,Instead you claimed that interpretation is put forward by the people that "want to incorperate what suits thier purposes in the context and reject what does not suit thier ideology". So, I will skip it, as neither of us accept that interpretation. Dawn Bertot writes:
You see the part where you try to change the wording used in the bible? all thats left is, was he persecuted by the government? The jewish leaders were under the authority of the Roman government., ie Herod, the jewish leaders The jewish leaders and the Roman government sentenced him to death If that is the interpretation, then Id say that was having someone on thier back (shoulder)You see where you try to change 'back' to 'shoulder'? That is the part where you twist the original meaning by changing the words. "and the government will be on his shoulders" does not mean "the government will be persecuting him". You have posted nothing to show it does. To repeat - again:
"and the government will be on his shoulders" does not mean "the government will be persecuting him". Therefore the prophecy is unfulfilled. Edited by Panda, : No reason given.Tradition and heritage are all dead people's baggage. Stop carrying it!
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Dawn Bertot Member (Idle past 114 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: |
You have not established that. Instead you claimed that interpretation is put forward by the people that "want to incorperate what suits thier purposes in the context and reject what does not suit thier ideology". So, I will skip it, as neither of us accept that interpretation. No my implication was that those that want to accept the OT writers meaning and interpretations, do so, then at the same time want to reject the writers implication and claim to inspiration IOWs why accept without question the OT writers meanings and claims, which is implied by setting it as a standard against the NT, then reject the NT writers for no good reason. That makes no sense Yet this is the approach you have adopted. You have not even established the OT writers are valid to know the NT writers are not. That approach makes very little sense I dont see anyother interpretation other than Lord of Lords and king of kings. What else is left to govern, if you are lord of heaven and earth I went with your interpretation and demonstrated from that perspective that he fulfilled that prophecy as well
You see the part where you try to change the wording used in the bible? You see where you try to change 'back' to 'shoulder'? That is the part where you twist the original meaning by changing the words. "and the government will be on his shoulders" does not mean "the government will be persecuting him". You have posted nothing to show it does. To repeat - again: "and the government will be on his shoulders" does not mean "the government will be persecuting him". Therefore the prophecy is unfulfilled. I dont think you understand how debate works. You made the above accusation several times now. I offered you examples of how your were mistaken. Your now obligated to examine those examples I provided in a counterfactual way and show why they are not valid. Repeating they he was not persecuted by the government is not the same as showing why Herod was not a procurator and why he was not prosecuted by both Heord and Pilate, not to mention the Jewish leaders That would be your obligation, if you want to go with that interpretation
To repeat - again: "and the government will be on his shoulders" does not mean "the government will be persecuting him". Therefore the prophecy is unfulfilled. Again this is how debate works. If this is your interpretation. "he was made both Lord and Christ". He was Lord of Lords, king of kings Col 2:9-14 9 For in him dwelleth all the fulness of the Godhead bodily. 10 And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power: 11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: 12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. 13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; 14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; 15 And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it. Dawn Bertot Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given. Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given. Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 425 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
I provided the link to the material in "THIS" thread so I did include the evidence in this thread. In case you missed it here is the link posted once again in this thread.
Are any of these prophecies fulfilled by Jesus? Here is the OP from that thread incorporated in this thread.
quote: The point though is that modern Christians are misrepresenting the Bible when they claim that the passage from John refers to the passage from Isaiah or that Isaiah was referring to Jesus. And again, you fail to show that I ever used "I just don't like it" as an argument.Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3744 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
Dawn Bertot writes:
I did not repeat that. Repeating they he was not persecuted by the government is not the same as showing why Herod was not a procurator and why he was not prosecuted by both Heord and Pilate, not to mention the Jewish leadersHere it is again: "and the government will be on his shoulders" does not mean "the government will be persecuting him". Prove otherwise or shut up. Dawn Bertot writes:
No. You made the claim that "and the government will be on his shoulders" means that "the government will be persecuting him". Again this is how debate works. If this is your interpretation. "he was made both Lord and Christ". He was Lord of Lords, king of kingsBut that is not true. You have not shown that those two phrases are synonymous. Instead you had to change the words to make them mean what you wanted them to mean. Showing that there existed a government does not show that "and the government will be on his shoulders" means "the government will be persecuting him".Showing that someone was a king does not show that "and the government will be on his shoulders" means "the government will be persecuting him". I repeat (a THIRD time!):
"and the government will be on his shoulders" does not mean "the government will be persecuting him". Therefore the prophecy is unfulfilled. Show otherwise or shut up. You made the claim: now justify it. I cannot view a 4th failure by you to even try to show that "and the government will be on his shoulders" means "the government will be persecuting him" as anything other than dishonesty.The ball is in your court. At least try to hit it. Tradition and heritage are all dead people's baggage. Stop carrying it!
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Jazzns Member (Idle past 3942 days) Posts: 2657 From: A Better America Joined: |
I haven't forgot about your last post. But since you move to another thread where I feel we may be more off topic than we were here if we were at all, can you suggest a thread we should move to?
BUT if objects for gratitude and admiration are our desire, do they not present themselves every hour to our eyes? Do we not see a fair creation prepared to receive us the instant we are born --a world furnished to our hands, that cost us nothing? Is it we that light up the sun; that pour down the rain; and fill the earth with abundance? Whether we sleep or wake, the vast machinery of the universe still goes on. Are these things, and the blessings they indicate in future, nothing to, us? Can our gross feelings be excited by no other subjects than tragedy and suicide? Or is the gloomy pride of man become so intolerable, that nothing can flatter it but a sacrifice of the Creator? --Thomas Paine
|
|||||||||||||||||||
GDR Member Posts: 6202 From: Sidney, BC, Canada Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
I'll start a new one but it may be a couple of days as I ruminate on it.
He has told you, O man, what is good ; And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, And to walk humbly with your God. Micah 6:8
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Dawn Bertot Member (Idle past 114 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: |
The point though is that modern Christians are misrepresenting the Bible when they claim that the passage from John refers to the passage from Isaiah or that Isaiah was referring to Jesus. And again, you fail to show that I ever used "I just don't like it" as an argument. Actually I can still make that claim because you continue to ignore most if not all arguments that I have advanced in this connection Firstly John is not the only person to make a reference to or claim the fulfillment of prophecy by using the words, "This is that which was spoken by the prophet....." there are to many to mention. If indeed the title of this thread is scriptrual evidence that Jesus was the Messiah, you would lose on that principle alone, because only a select few would suggest that the NT is not scripture But lets go further Did you notice verse three of the Isa quote. "This is what the Lord says". You know what jar, I dont even think you actually believe that. Lets try it both way. First lets assume you dont, that would ofcourse make the writer unstable or unreliable at best. At worst he would be psychotic. At any rate his words would have no value in establishing any truth, especially that which you are assuming he may be speaking. At bare minimum you would have no real clue if he was correct or just muzing. Nextly, you would not know that he was not refering to somone else in his own mind, even if it was Jesus or not. You could not possibly know And finally if God is not actually involved in the actual process, his prophecies would carry about as much importance as Nostrodomous Lets assume now you do believe God is involved in its providence, that is the writer is actually inspired and the prophecy is actually real You assume without question, in any real sense that he is inspired and reliable, because you use him as a source to deny another source claiming fulfillment This being the case, you would need to establish from a rational, documentary and historical context, why the writers of the NT are not ,reliable, as inspired to show what the fulfillment may or may not be Just claiming the NT writers are quote mining is tantamount to saying I just dont like it, because you have failed to involve, all the OT writer claimed and put forward as evidence of his prophecy., ie inspiration These are the things you need to do. Can you do these things? If you cannot, I will assume I am as justified in believing the NT writers, as you are the OT IOWs Jar, it takes more, much much more, to say it is not talking about Jesus, than to claim his name is not mentioned Only inspiration could make the OT prophecies, have a dual meaning. A type and a shadow Is it possible the NT writers made this alll up. It would be possible, except for the information we have about Jesus Christ, his life and his death IOWs, if there were no factual information about Jesus anywhere, that may be a very real possibility Fortunately we have that information So, I am sorry jar you have only advanced a tenth of your responsibilites, concerning what the OT prophet was claiming Jar writes As you can see, What Isaiah is talking about is Jerusalem, and his audience is Judah, and it is the subject of Judah's future that is the big question. I have no doubt about that, but as you will notice, another prophet claimed through inspiration "Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet's own interpretation For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit." 2 Pet 1:20 Always keep in mind, prophecy is about God, whenever and whereever. If indeed Isa was speaking about Jerusalem, it is ultimately God is that Jerusalem's king, therefore ultimately about God or what he is doingDawn Bertot Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given. Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given. Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given. Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 425 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
I do not just claim that the authors of the various New Testament writings are quote mining, I demonstrate it by including the context that was written in the Old Testament writings.
That the author of John makes a claim is not evidence of anything except that the author made that claim. To find out if the claim can be supported one must actually look at what was written in the Old Testament story, which I did and even quoted for you. Scriptural support that a New Testament author claimed that prophecies in the Old Testament refer to Jesus is about as valid as the Star Wars tales providing evidence that Darth Vader really is Luke Skywalker's father. Inspiration is irrelevant of course, what is relevant is what they wrote and what they quote mined when seen in context. The writer may well have been inspired, bad burritos can do that. You of course are free to believe anything you want, advance any idea you wish, the question is whether or not you can support those ideas, those beliefs with evidence. Once again I refer you to Message 3, Message 6 and Are any of these prophecies fulfilled by Jesus? where you will find actual evidence and not just fantasy and supposition. AbE: by the way, the unknown author of 2Peter is not one of the Prophets. Edited by jar, : see AbE:Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Dawn Bertot Member (Idle past 114 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: |
To find out if the claim can be supported one must actually look at what was written in the Old Testament story, which I did and even quoted for you. And ofcourse you refuse to acknowledge actual inspiration. Because when you do, it renders your claim as nothing more than complaining
I do not just claim that the authors of the various New Testament writings are quote mining, I demonstrate it by including the context that was written in the Old Testament writings. That is tantamount to complaining, if they are actually inspired. Since you do not claim they were not inspired, your next step is to show them unreliable from a documentary and historical context if God is involved you cannot know what his intentions or purposes were Since you claim no inspiration yourself, you must demonstrate them as unreliable Have at it. Dawn Bertot
|
|||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 425 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
I test to see if their claim is accurate.
The issue is simple, does the claim stand up to examination? And of course I have shown the alleged prophecies to be unreliable. Once again I refer you to Message 3, Message 6 and Are any of these prophecies fulfilled by Jesus? where you will find actual evidence and not just fantasy and supposition. AbE: by the way, the unknown author of 2Peter is not one of the Prophets.Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||
Dawn Bertot Member (Idle past 114 days) Posts: 3571 Joined: |
I test to see if their claim is accurate. Wrong. By accurate you mean the "part" of the OT prophet you choose to use, to measure the NT prophet Since you refuse to accept all the OT writes have to say or claim,, then it follows logically that you cannot rely on only a portion of his words I believe that is called bias, correct
AbE: by the way, the unknown author of 2Peter is not one of the Prophets. Comical, you know 2 Pet is spurious, but rely on the authorship and accuracy of Isa to refute another writer. Hmmmmm? jar you havent even got out the logical starting gate to examine the actual prophecies themself You need interpretation 101 Dawn Bertot Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given. Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024