Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 62 (9094 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: d3r31nz1g3
Post Volume: Total: 901,672 Year: 12,784/6,534 Month: 67/2,210 Week: 8/390 Day: 8/20 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Isaiah 53 speaks about ISRAEL, and not about the messiah.
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 930 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 60 of 176 (716458)
01-17-2014 7:30 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by GDR
10-20-2013 7:59 AM


GDR writes
I also think that it is a mistake for Christians to look for messianic proof texts in the OT. You are right that the writers of the OT probably didn’t look at it that way and that Israel was to be the servant of God.
But Luke 24:, Says
13 Now that same day two of them were going to a village called Emmaus, about seven miles[a] from Jerusalem. 14 They were talking with each other about everything that had happened. 15 As they talked and discussed these things with each other, Jesus himself came up and walked along with them; 16 but they were kept from recognizing him.
17 He asked them, What are you discussing together as you walk along?
They stood still, their faces downcast. 18 One of them, named Cleopas, asked him, Are you the only one visiting Jerusalem who does not know the things that have happened there in these days?
19 What things? he asked.
About Jesus of Nazareth, they replied. He was a prophet, powerful in word and deed before God and all the people. 20 The chief priests and our rulers handed him over to be sentenced to death, and they crucified him; 21 but we had hoped that he was the one who was going to redeem Israel. And what is more, it is the third day since all this took place. 22 In addition, some of our women amazed us. They went to the tomb early this morning 23 but didn’t find his body. They came and told us that they had seen a vision of angels, who said he was alive. 24 Then some of our companions went to the tomb and found it just as the women had said, but they did not see Jesus.
25 He said to them, How foolish you are, and how slow to believe all that the prophets have spoken! 26 Did not the Messiah have to suffer these things and then enter his glory? 27 And beginning with Moses and
ALL the Prophets,
he explained to them what was said in ALL the Scriptures concerning himself.
28 As they approached the village
So why would you think this was a bad idea, if this exacally what the Lord did?
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by GDR, posted 10-20-2013 7:59 AM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by GDR, posted 01-20-2014 7:44 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 930 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 63 of 176 (716745)
01-20-2014 9:46 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by GDR
01-20-2014 7:44 PM


With respect, there are so many contradictory and illogical statements in your paragraphs I dont know where to start
The real reason that many like to use quotes from the OT as messianic proof texts is more about justifying belief in an inerrant Bible than it is about understanding Jesus.
GDR, one of the ways one establishes reliability is prophecy itself, therefore, wheather its about the Messiah or something else. Its an evidence of its inerrancy and accuracy
Unless Jesus was resurrected and is alive and well then it doesn't matter what the OT says about a coming messiah. If Jesus was resurrected then we don't need further proof.
Prophecy concerning his Messiahship combined with the Gospel stories, is how we establish his alive and well
If Jesus claimed the spoke of him and supported him, then it follows we should use them for that purpose
If however, they (old testament prophecies) are inaccurate and unreliable and Jesus claimed they were accurate concerning him, then we cannot rely even on what he said
Are you starting to see how logic works GDR. Jesus had no problems or concerns with the Old Testament prophecies, especially concerning wheather they were reliable or accurate
But what we do need from the OT is a careful reading of the Gospels so that we can not just understand the social message, but also so that we can make sense of the narrative of what God has done, is doing and in vague terms will do.
Im not sure what this means or how it applies
Dawn Bertot

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by GDR, posted 01-20-2014 7:44 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by GDR, posted 01-24-2014 10:52 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 930 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 65 of 176 (717207)
01-25-2014 12:53 AM
Reply to: Message 64 by GDR
01-24-2014 10:52 PM


Jesus illuminated the scriptures by showing how they applied to him. However as evidenced by the fact that the Jews and even the disciples had a very different understanding of what was being prophesied makes it clear that the scriptures weren't inerrant and that it took Jesus to correct and clarify them.
Lets start here, because herein I think the problem lies. You said I start with an idea of inerrancy, which is incorrect. I start with the fact that the facts in the Bible, old or new can be corroborated by history, archeo, dates, times, peoples and places, etc
I wouldnt believe in inerrancy and infallibility, if these things could be invalidated, they cant
Some of the disciples misunderstanding of scripture or its meaning has nothing to do with thier accuracy or inerrancy
Jesus was correcting thier misunderstanding, NOT the scriptures. "The scripture cannot be broken"
I understand how your logic works. You start with an inerrant Bible making that the focus of your worship. As a Christian I start with Jesus as the embodied Word of God and understand the Bible in light of that.
Let me help you respectfully with logic or sound reasoning. To say you do not believe in the inerrancy of scripture, but trust Jesus, is a bit silly. Since the olny place you know anything about Jesus is from scripture. I hope that helps
Your idea which you deem logical requires you to believe in a God who will advocate that his followers engage in genocide and public stonings for misdemeanors such as picking up firewood on the sabbath and then somehow square that with Jesus saying that we are to love our enemies and forgive them. Some logic.
Dear friend you have to make a distinction between what is allowable to and by God and what he does not allow us to do
My logic requires that I accept all the scripture has to say about Gods nature, justice, mercy and judgement, specifically that he is infinite in wisdom and understanding, you and I are not
I cant just pick out of the Bible what I like and dont like then form some half baked conclusion about what should be acepted and what should be rejected. You are actually making yourself god in that instance
Some logic.
If you dont even start with the basics of sound reasoning, you can imagine or devise anything you want
Little Sammy Harris does it in his comical book called the Moral Landscape. He honestly believes that because nature gave him a conscience and he can experience feelings and pain that he has developed an actual morality
he forgets the basics, that given his philosophical naturalism in the form of Natural Selection and adaptation, all of which are greater than him and his perceptions, they care little or nothing about his percieved ability to distinguish between right and wrong
he fails to understand that all of nature and reality that created him and gave him these qualites is still greater than himself.
He fails to understand that he cannot have an actual morality, where the thing greater than himself, actually does not
he fails to understand that when the universe closes in on itself, should he happen to be around, it will not care or change its plans, even though it will bring little Sammy unbareable pain and suffering
Little Sammy builds a whole "ethic" around something he cannot demonstrate from any rational standpoint, yet he proceeds on, ignoring simple logic and reasoning principles
He does not understand that to have any real morality, he would have to demonstrate that the entirity of reality actually has any moral guidlines. it appears that Natual Selection, Adaptation, is the norm in his world view. And those bad boys care very little about your or my suffering
He does not understand that you cannot have an ACTUAL morality, when that "morality" applies only to his species. percieved morality is not actual morality, from the standpoint of logic developed from what reality will allow logically.
Perceptions are fine, but they must conform to what the limits of reality will allow.
Little sammy seems to care nothing for the basics. Heck for that matter, neither do most of the secular fundamental hunanist here
GDR, You have got to start with the very basics of what reality and reason will allow before you start forming ideas and opinions. It might sell books for him, but any serious thinker is holding thier stomach and laughing aloud
I'm simply saying that to understand the entirety of Scripture you have to start with the resurrected Jesus of the Gospels and not the other way around, as did Paul and the rest of the early Christians.
Your admiration and zeal for the Lord is nothing short of amazing, its just you thinking that needs alittle fine tuning
So you are saying that the resurrection of Jesus can't stand on it's own and that it needs prophesy to validate it. This is the problem with inerrancy. You replace Jesus with the Bible.
The resurrection cannot stand on its own GDR, you and I were not thier to witness it. Jesus said to Thomas, "You have seen me and believed, blessed are they who have not seen YET believe"
What criteria would you and I use GDR, but the same type of criteria we would use to establish the relaibilty of the Old Testament
It does not matter what I believe God did or did not do in the old testament GDR, if I cant even establish, the reliability of the book or writer
It does not matter whether Jesus actually rose from the dead, if I cannot establish the writers accuracy about that e vent. It would just be another story, correct? As they say first things first
We have to start with the resurrection itself. If the resurrection is not historical then the whole thing is a waste of time and as Paul says we are to be pitied.
What type of resoning and what type of criteria would you use to establish the resurrection as historical?
Dawn 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.
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.
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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by GDR, posted 01-24-2014 10:52 PM GDR has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by GDR, posted 01-25-2014 9:19 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 930 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 68 of 176 (717552)
01-29-2014 12:09 AM
Reply to: Message 66 by GDR
01-25-2014 9:19 PM


I realize that someone who doesn't agree with you can't be following simple logic or sound reasoning, but I'm doing the best I can.
Of course you are doint the best you can, that is all any of can do. And of course anybody that feels they are being disagreed with, believes the other person is not being logical, thats just debating
There are contradictions throughout the scriptures including inconsequential ones such as the genealogys of Jesus or the times and locations of events after the resurrection.
of course there are no inconsequential contradictions, if they are contradictions at all then they nullify the text and the writer. These so-called contradictions usually amount to nothing more than misunderstandings of the actual situation involved, perspective of the writer, purpose of the writer, etc
The major problem though is that your understanding of the Bible leads to belief in a god who is inconsistent in that he is sometimes cruel and vengeful and sometimes loving and forgiving. If you want to worship a god like that then you are obviously free to do that. I worship the God whose Word is incarnate in Jesus Christ and is always loving, merciful, and just.
No the major problem is that you are letting your personal feelings interfere with what YOU think God should do or not do, how he should act or not act
To demonstrate that point, the same testament that tells you of Christ, also, explains that at the end of time, a place is being prepared that will make genocide look likes childs play. And I dont mean that in a sacrcasric way
We simply cant decide for ourselves how God should or should not act. Again I say your zeal is commendable
Firstly there can be errors with the fundamental aspects remaining true and secondly you seem to deny any possibility of God's Spirit informing us of His truth.
No I am affirming that God has given us his truth, but not only about certain things, but to include his purposes and his nature and dealings with humanity across the years
I have also read several other books on the same subject and have spent a number of years studying the Bible since accepting the Christian faith in my thirties.
You sound like a good fellow and true follower of Christ, never stop my friend, never stop
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by GDR, posted 01-25-2014 9:19 PM GDR has not replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 930 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 69 of 176 (717553)
01-29-2014 12:20 AM
Reply to: Message 67 by Eliyahu
01-29-2014 12:03 AM


If the disciples, who saw the "resurrected JC" with their own eyes, still doubted, why then do the Christians 2000 years later, who have nothing to go by but stories, don't doubt?
But my friend you are making the same fundamental error GDR is making. The evidence leads us in a certain direction. Does it prove it absolutely? No? But the general evidence is that the NT writers were reliable and correct
What evidence do you have that YOUR brain actually exists? have you ever seen it? Well NO. But most of the external evidence would say that you actually have a brain correct?
Dawn Bertot
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by Eliyahu, posted 01-29-2014 12:03 AM Eliyahu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by Eliyahu, posted 01-29-2014 7:24 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 930 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 71 of 176 (717644)
01-29-2014 10:45 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by Eliyahu
01-29-2014 7:24 AM


A person in different form from the old JC, who was not recognized by the people he interacted with for years, only days before, doesn't that sounds like an impostor who is pretending to be the resurrected JC?
That also explains why some of the disciples doubted when the "resurrected JC" appeared to them: "When they saw him, they worshiped him; but some doubted." Matt 28:17.
Can you imagine that the authentic JC appears to you and you still doubt?
Apparently he was not so authentic.
Do you think God was trying to decieve Abraham or Joshua when he apeared to them in a form other than that which he actually is?
Do you think that these people did not believe this was actually God when he made these visits to these individuals, in another form than his actual form?
So was God not authentic in these instances?
Dawn Bertot
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by Eliyahu, posted 01-29-2014 7:24 AM Eliyahu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 73 by Eliyahu, posted 01-30-2014 1:40 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 930 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 72 of 176 (717647)
01-29-2014 10:59 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by Eliyahu
01-29-2014 7:24 AM


"If your very own brother, or your son or daughter, or the wife you love, or your closest friend secretly entices you, saying, Let us go and worship other gods (gods that neither you nor your ancestors have known, gods of the peoples around you, whether near or far, from one end of the land to the other), do not yield to them or listen to them. Show them no pity. Do not spare them or shield them. You must certainly put them to death. Your hand must be the first in putting them to death, and then the hands of all the people. Stone them to death, because they tried to turn you away from Y-H-W-H your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery. Then all Israel will hear and be afraid, and no one among you will do such an evil thing again.
If you hear it said about one of the towns Y-H-W-H your God is giving you to live in that troublemakers have arisen among you and have led the people of their town astray, saying, Let us go and worship other gods (gods you have not known), then you must inquire, probe and investigate it thoroughly. And if it is true and it has been proved that this detestable thing has been done among you, you must certainly put to the sword all who live in that town. You must destroy it completely, both its people and its livestock. You are to gather all the plunder of the town into the middle of the public square and completely burn the town and all its plunder as a whole burnt offering to Y-H-W-H your God. That town is to remain a ruin forever, never to be rebuilt, and none of the condemned things are to be found in your hands. Then Y-H-W-H will turn from his fierce anger, will show you mercy, and will have compassion on you. He will increase your numbers, as he promised on oath to your ancestors because you obey Y-H-W-H your God by keeping all his commands that I am giving you today and doing what is right in his eyes."
Deut 13
To get the ball rolling, so to speak, let me ask you a quick question. If you believe these verses are true amd are actually from God, what type of evidence would you use or establish to support the idea that they are authentic?
IOWs, why do you believe the methodology for establishing the Old Testaments reliability, is any different that that of the New Testament? Arent they the same?
The general evidence is that the NT is not reliable and contradicts the Tanach.
How is the general evidence that supports the NT UNreliable and how is it any different than that which supports the Old Testament
The NT shows us a supposed messiah who didn't fulfill the messianic prophecies.
The NT shows us a supposed messiah who didn't even fulfill his own prophecies.
The NT rips Tanach texts which have no bearing on the messiah out of context, mistranslates them, and presents them as "messianic prophecies fulfilled by JC".
In a general sense how can you pretend to speak for Gods purposes over time
Since the Old and New Testaments are the only real texts that can boast a certain type of evidence over long periods of time, how can you be sure the NT, is not fulfillment of his original intentions and plans
But first it would behove you to show me why you believe anything you quoted to me is reliable to begin with
However, if you wish to agree that the NTs truth claims are established, using the same type of evidencem as the Old, then we can move on from that point
But at bare minimum, this is where rational conversation has to start
Fair enough
Dawn Bertot
.
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by Eliyahu, posted 01-29-2014 7:24 AM Eliyahu has not replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 930 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 74 of 176 (717791)
02-01-2014 11:15 AM
Reply to: Message 73 by Eliyahu
01-30-2014 1:40 AM


Nowhere in the Tanach do you see a human being claiming he is God.
God clearly says that He is not a man:
God is not human, that he should lie, Num 23:19
He who is the Glory of Israel does not lie or change his mind; for he is not a human being, that he should change his mind. 1 Samuel 15:29
For I am God, and not a man the Holy One among you. Hosea 11:9
So when a human being says he is God, you stone him:
Sorry for the lateness of my response, got busy.
I see you have started another thread along the same lines, possibly I could transition this theme to that one in time. In the meantime ill continue here.
You seem to jump from one point to the next without answering questions or addrssing arguments
Your original point was that because Jesus appeared in different forms to people, that this made him unauthentic
I pointed out that God did the samething in OT. there was no response to this argument
I next pointed out that the NT boasts the same type of evidence for its reliability as the Old. You avoided this argument and question as well
You now seem to want to talk about, whether the OT has a man claiming to be God
The passages you quoted have nothing to do with whether God can represent himself as a man, AS HE CLEARLY DID. The passages you quoted are simply stating that God in his entire essence is not like man, not that he cannot represent himself in human form, or come in the form of human
God odesnt stop being God even if he lives as a man.
So your indirect argument that God never came as a human being is contradicted both by the examples in the Old and New testaments
If Gods intention in the passages you quoted are to assume God cannot live as a human, or represent himself as a human, as he clearly did, then you will need to look for other passages to support your assertion
It would be helpful if you would actually attend to some of the arguments I am making instead of just making comments and quoting more passages
This approach you undertake makes it appear as if you dont really understand how debate works
Dawn Bertot
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by Eliyahu, posted 01-30-2014 1:40 AM Eliyahu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by Eliyahu, posted 02-01-2014 11:39 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 930 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 76 of 176 (717834)
02-02-2014 1:24 AM
Reply to: Message 75 by Eliyahu
02-01-2014 11:39 PM


God can appear anyway He wants.
Im glad you believe this. If God chooses to appear as a human, then he has not violated the statement, God is not a man, that he should lie. If God chooses to live as a human in human form,he neither violates or gives up his nature and essence as God
The Tanach is accepted by both Christian and Jew as being inspired by God, so I don't have to proof that the Tanach is from God. What I'm doing is proving that the NT is not from God. This by showing that JC was a false prophet, showing that the messianic prophecies are not fulfilled, and other inconsistencies in the NT.
Yes the tenach is accepted by both, but how and why. What do you do when people try and point out inconsistencies in the Tenach
The supporting evidence for both is of the same type. If Jesus was a false prophet, why then was not Moses, since it is claimed he didnt actually write the he books he claimed to have penned
The Tanach says that God IS NOT a human.
The NT says he was a human. So also on that point the NT contradicts the Tanach.
Some prophets in the Tanach saw the figure of a human, but God never was a human.
The Tenach also says God put to death, men, women and children, does this mean he is a murderer
The NT says "That in him dwelt ALL THE FULNESS of the Godhead in human form" Colosians. Does this make him strickly human, no?
He is not human, the same way he is not a murderer, even though he takes life ofr his own reasons
The statement,"God is not human", relates to his overall nature, he is not finite, he is infinte
While he has freewill, he cannot lie,because he is infinte in wisdom and knowledge. There is no reason or purpose to lie
Exodus 20:4 You shall not make for yourself an idol, or any likeness of what is in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the water under the earth. 5"You shall not worship them or serve them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, on the third and the fourth generations of those who hate Me, 6but showing lovingkindness to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments.
So if God fashions himself in the likeness of humans, has he broke his own rules
Neither is God violating or denying that he is not human, when living as a human
Your reading t much into the statment
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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by Eliyahu, posted 02-01-2014 11:39 PM Eliyahu has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 90 by Dredge, posted 04-25-2017 11:47 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2022 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022