• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Shoe is on the other foot: Prove there is not God.

Archer

Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by Humanistheart
That may be a good idea.

Isaiah 11:1 Show's us the messiah must be of the bloodline of david. We don't have marry's lineage and Jospeh is not the biological father so that's out.

AHH? but legally he is of the blood line.

Ezekiel 37:26-28 - Build the Third Temple; Jesus didn't do this and to my knowledge no one else has yet either.
John 2:19-21Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days? But he spake of the temple of his body. Matthew 26:59-61 Now the chief priests, and elders, and all the council, sought false witness against Jesus, to put him to death; But found none: yea, though many false witnesses came, yet found they none. At the last came two false witnesses, And said, This fellow said, I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three days. Mark 14:57-58 And there arose certain, and bare false witness against him, saying, We heard him say, I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and within three days I will build another made without hands.

Isaiah 43:5-6 - The messiah will gather all jewish people back to their promised land of Isreal. The jewish diaspora only worsened after jesus, and the death of his portrayed in the bible has been a nifty excuse through the years to abuse jewish people.

Are they Back? Yes! If not for the Christian movement the whole area would be Muslim! I am not saying other peoples did not help? ALSO Hitler was a lunatic!

Isaiah 2:4 The messiah is to usher in an age of peace and prosperity for the world. Jesus did not do this. He was in fact viewed as a criminal in his time, and christian followers have braught an immence amount of war and death in their short time on this earth. Quite the opposite of the prophecy.

Just wait, read revelations it is coming.

Zechariah 14:9 The messiah will bring the world to one single true understanding of Yaweigh. Jesus did not accomplish this. In fact christianity has led to numerous offshoot religions, further confusing the concept of the god of abraham.

Just wait, read revelations it is coming.

Deut. 13:1-4, while not a messianic prophecy, says that anyone who commes to change torah, to change the law, is a false prophet. Jesus changed a lot of things now didn't he.

The Torah was not changed, a new testament was written to replace it. Jesus was not just anyone, he had the authority.

Etc etc. Jesus was not a messiah, he was not a god, so yes, we can conclude the christian god concept has been disproved.
 
Last edited:

The Neo Nerd

Well-Known Member
Why won't you answer my question archer.


Andser my question, it's a simple enough one.

-Q
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Humanistheart

Well-Known Member
Originally Posted by Humanistheart
That may be a good idea.

Isaiah 11:1 Show's us the messiah must be of the bloodline of david. We don't have marry's lineage and Jospeh is not the biological father so that's out.

AHH? but legally he is of the blood line.

No, blood line is not something that can be passed on through adoption. Just as a priest of the line of aron could adopt a son, but the son could not become a priest. Likewise a king could adopt a child but they would not be considered royalty. Adopted doesn' count when you see the words lineage or blood line.

Ezekiel 37:26-28 - Build the Third Temple; Jesus didn't do this and to my knowledge no one else has yet either.

John 2:19-21Jesus answered and said unto them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up. Then said the Jews, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days? But he spake of the temple of his body. Matthew 26:59-61 Now the chief priests, and elders, and all the council, sought false witness against Jesus, to put him to death; But found none: yea, though many false witnesses came, yet found they none. At the last came two false witnesses, And said, This fellow said, I am able to destroy the temple of God, and to build it in three days. Mark 14:57-58 And there arose certain, and bare false witness against him, saying, We heard him say, I will destroy this temple that is made with hands, and within three days I will build another made without hands.

I'll point out two things. One, I'll refer you to my previous post for. The temple was specified, by the god of the tannack, both in physical perameters and location. There is nothing in the prophicies that indicate it would be anything but a physical place. Second, jesus' own words did not come to pass, as usual. The 2nd temple wasn't destroyed when jesus was crucified, or when he rose. It lasted several decades. In john it says, destroy the temple and in 3 days I'll raise it up. So what, jesus didn't build this 3rd temple in human hearts until decades after his death when the 2nd temple was finally destroyed? You must admitt that's quite a stretch.

Isaiah 43:5-6 - The messiah will gather all jewish people back to their promised land of Isreal. The jewish diaspora only worsened after jesus, and the death of his portrayed in the bible has been a nifty excuse through the years to abuse jewish people.

Are they Back? If not for the Christian movement the whole area would be Muslim! I am not saying other peoples did not help but in that region? Hitler was a lunatic!

First of all, if not for the christian movement, muslims wouldn't exist. Islam is founded on ideas from both christianity and judaism. Without christians, muslims wouldn't exist. Second of all, I'll remind you that the messiah did not re-establish Isreal. As you pointed out other countries suppplied the jewish people the technology to go in and erradicate the palistinians from the area. Rather ironic that following the jewish holocaust they would then attempt to commit their own version of it now isn't it. Besides, Isreal to this day does not house all the jews of the world. It doesn't have the majority of the jewish people there. So that's out. Nor is it ruled by a king, much less one from the line of david. Another Fail.

Isaiah 2:4 The messiah is to usher in an age of peace and prosperity for the world. Jesus did not do this. He was in fact viewed as a criminal in his time, and christian followers have braught an immence amount of war and death in their short time on this earth. Quite the opposite of the prophecy.

Just wait, read revelations it is coming.

The prophicy says the messiah will do this in his lifetime, not in a second lifetime. Also I'll remind you that the early christians, following the deciples thought he'd be back in there lifetime. Well, nearly 2000 years later and he's still a no show. But even if that answer could be accepted, which I see no reason for it to be, the fact is he still hasn't done this. You can't call someone a mesiah because you think they'll eventually fullfill the prophicies, you call him one because he HAS fullfilled them. If jesus comes back and does those things, then maybe we can check off Isahai 2:4, but untill then this is another fail. I mean, you might as well call me the messiah but that logic because I can claim I'll come back from the dead one day and fullfill them too. And anyone who doesn't believe this can just be told 'wait and see'.

Zechariah 14:9 The messiah will bring the world to one single true understanding of Yaweigh. Jesus did not accomplish this. In fact christianity has led to numerous offshoot religions, further confusing the concept of the god of abraham.

Just wait, read revelations it is coming..
See previous. I'll also point out that christians can't even agree on their god concept, much less the entire world.

Deut. 13:1-4, while not a messianic prophecy, says that anyone who commes to change torah, to change the law, is a false prophet. Jesus changed a lot of things now didn't he.

The Torah was not changed, a new testament was written to replace it. Jesus was not just anyone, he had the authority.

Replacement is change now isn't it. Why would an eternal ever constant god change his concept of morality? Seems a little silly for you to expect us to believe that.

So the statement stands, jesus was a false god, and thus the christian god concept has been proved false.
 
Last edited:

Archer

Well-Known Member
Why won't you answer my question archer.

Is it because you are too stupid to answer it or because it damages your argument.



This is so typical of ignorant bible thumpers, they come across an argument that goes against their beliefs and instead of taking it in and thinking about like a logical rational adult, they refuse to accept it and ignore it.

It's truly pathetic.

Answer my question, it's a simple enough one.

-Q

I have answered so much crap and I will not be called stupid by a **** ant whiney pot.

You know my premise disprove The Christian God, for now.
 

Tristesse

Well-Known Member
I have answered so much crap and I will not be called stupid by a **** ant whiney pot.

You know my premise disprove The Christian God, for now.

Why should the christian god be disproved? If someone claimed to be abducted by aliens, would it be your job to disprove their claim or theirs to prove? Because if you don't believe their claim because of insufficient evidence, than you are exactly in the same position as me with regards to the god you happen to believe in.
 

Humanistheart

Well-Known Member
Why should the christian god be disproved? If someone claimed to be abducted by aliens, would it be your job to disprove their claim or theirs to prove? Because if you don't believe their claim because of insufficient evidence, than you are exactly in the same position as me with regards to the god you happen to believe in.

Triste, I agree with you that in real life or any formal debate the burden of proof is on the thiest, not the other way around. But Archer started this thread with that challenge in the OP, so it is up to anyone who wishes to respond on this thread to do so in accordance with this threads stipulations.
 

Tristesse

Well-Known Member
Triste, I agree with you that in real life or any formal debate the burden of proof is on the thiest, not the other way around. But Archer started this thread with that challenge in the OP, so it is up to anyone who wishes to respond on this thread to do so in accordance with this threads stipulations.

No, I understand the purpose of this thread. But I'm just not sure that archer understands that the inability to disprove necessarily means that he wins by default.
 

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
So the statement stands, jesus was a false god, and thus the christian god concept has been proved false.
That's a crappy argument. Even if all your points are valid, there's no reason to assume it means that Jesus was a false God any more than it means that God exists and the Bible got things wrong.
 

Humanistheart

Well-Known Member
That's a crappy argument. Even if all your points are valid, there's no reason to assume it means that Jesus was a false God any more than it means that God exists and the Bible got things wrong.

It's an argument based on scripture, I realize that's not how most atheists approach things, and thus probably the source of your opinion there, but it's every bit as valid, if not more, than many of the other responces I've seen to Archer's challenge so far. Also keep in mind the bible's the only source for jesus's life. If my argument merely show's that the bible got things wrong, then you must ask what things? Smaller details, or big picture stuff? That seems like a topic for another thread, but lets say this shows jesus wasn't the messiah, but he could still be god. The christians believe in a god trinity in whitch the son was the jewish messiah. At the very least, it still proves the christian god doesn't exist. If I described Penguin as a very girlish man, who loves painintg his nials going to gay bars and who's totally into the d/s lifestyle, am I describing you, or a person who's loosely based on you, more in name than anything? I'm guessing it's the latter option, so that version of Penguin, based on you, doesn't exist. At the very least then the same could be said of the christian god, if your argument is correct.

Of course, if it is so crappy, surely you can demolish my argument with a counter of your own quite easily. Since archer's logged off for the time being, perhaps you'd like to take up where he left off? I do so enjoy biblical debates, and the best way to learn is by making mistakes and being called on them, so please, be my guest :)

(dear lord I need to get my spell check up and running! Srry about all the errors.)
 
Last edited:

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
It's an argument based on scripture, I realize that's not how most atheists approach things, and thus probably the source of your opinion there, but it's every bit as valid, if not more, than many of the other responces I've seen to Archer's challenge so far.
The question isn't whether your approach is valid than other approaches. It's a matter of whether your approach is valid or not. And it's not.

Also keep in mind the bible's the only source for jesus's life.
No, it's not.

If my argument merely show's that the bible got things wrong, then you must ask what things? Smaller details, or big picture stuff? That seems like a topic for another thread.
Even if the Bible was written by a blindfolded drunken monkey, this fact alone wouldn't disprove the claim that Jesus existed.

Of course, if it is so crappy, surely you can demolish my argument with a counter of your own quite easily. Since archer's logged of for the time being, perhaps you'd like to take up where he left off? I do so enjoy biblical debates, and the best way to learn is by making mistakes and being called on them, so please, be my gueast :)
Here's the thing: you've disproven that the depiction of Jesus in the Gospels doesn't match your interpretation of the messiah prophecies in the OT. However, that's only one step. To actually disprove the existence of the God Jesus, you also have to establish certain other things:

- the OT verses you cite are actually Messiah prophecies.
- these verses are accurate retelling of what these prophecies say.
- your interpretation of those prophecies (e.g that if Jesus fulfills them at the Second Coming, this doesn't count for some reason) is necessarily correct.
- the OT Messiah is necessarily God (or, if you prefer, that Jesus is necessarily the Messiah prophecied in the OT).
- the Gospels are an accurate description of the life of Jesus.

Until you do all that, you haven't validly supported your conclusion.
 

Humanistheart

Well-Known Member
The question isn't whether your approach is valid than other approaches. It's a matter of whether your approach is valid or not. And it's not..

So you claim, but you're not offering any reasoning for why that would be the case. A bold claim with nothing to back it up does not strike me as valid in any way shape or form. Perhaps you'd like to support your claim next time?

No, it's not..

Oh really, then please enlighten us. What other source describes jesus' character, actions and words? There are some sources that indicate he existed, but we're not debating his existance we're debating his god hood, and none of those sources give us any information on the man other than the indication that he lived. Not very helpful in this thread. This reminds me of archers "God is!" It's great that you believe it's not the only source but you can't expect us to merely take your word for it.


Even if the Bible was written by a blindfolded drunken monkey, this fact alone wouldn't disprove the claim that Jesus existed..

I'm not debating jesus's existance, I'm debating his godhood, which then relates back to weather or not the christian god, as described, exists. See previous.

Here's the thing: you've disproven that the depiction of Jesus in the Gospels doesn't match your interpretation of the messiah prophecies in the OT. However, that's only one step. To actually disprove the existence of the God Jesus, you also have to establish certain other things:

- the OT verses you cite are actually Messiah prophecies.
- these verses are accurate retelling of what these prophecies say.
- your interpretation of those prophecies (e.g that if Jesus fulfills them at the Second Coming, this doesn't count for some reason) is necessarily correct.
- the OT Messiah is necessarily God (or, if you prefer, that Jesus is necessarily the Messiah prophecied in the OT).
- the Gospels are an accurate description of the life of Jesus.

Until you do all that, you haven't validly supported your conclusion.

I think you mean to say the verses from the tannack. And yes, I have supported my argument. But, yet again, if you think this is not the case, feel free to offer reasoning on why I have not met my goal. Simply claiming I have not is not a valid form of debate. I listed reasoning, you have not, Penguin I normally respect your posts but your way off here. It's not my job to prove your point for you, it's yours. So it's up to you, either prove my argument isn't valid with genuine reasoning or prove your point is valid. You have currently done niether, making your unfounded assertion that I have not supported my claims rather ironic and hypocritical. Also, while it's hardly important, I must point out it's innacurate to say my interpretation of the messianic prophicies. Everything I've said is supported in Judiasm.
 
Last edited:

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
So you claim, but you're not offering any reasoning for why that would be the case.
I did immediately following.

A bold claim with nothing to back it up does not strike me as valid in any way shape or form.
Ha! If this isn't the pot calling the kettle black, I don't know what is.

Oh really, then please enlighten us. What other source describes jesus' character, actions and words? There are some sources that indicate he existed, but we're not debating his existance we're debating his god hood, and none of those sources give us any information on the man other than the indication that he lived. Not very helpful in this thread. This reminds me of archers "God is!" It's great that you believe it's not the only source but you can't expect us to merely take your word for it.
There are plenty of other sources: off the top of my head, there's non-canonical gospels, oral tradition, the Book of Mormon, purported direct divine inspiration... all of these contain information about Jesus' character, actions and words. Whether they're correct or not is another question, but it applies just as much to the Bible as it does to them.

I'm not debating jesus's existance, I'm debating his godhood, which then relates back to weather or not the christian god, as described, exists. See previous.
Same argument applies. It's perfectly valid in many Christian contexts to simply say that Jesus is God and the ancient Jews got some details wrong. I suspect it's also valid in many more Christian contexts to say that Jesus is God, the ancient Jews were right, and you're just mis-interpreting their prophecies.

I think you mean to say the verses from the tannack.
I'm grateful that you're here to tell me what I mean to say. :sarcastic

And yes, I have supported my argument. But, yet again, if you think this is not the case, feel free to offer reasoning on why I have not met my goal. Simply claiming I have not is not a valid form of debate.
Neither is giving an argument for one thing and then claiming it proves something else.

I listed reasoning, you have not, Penguin I normally respect your posts but your way off here. It's not my job to prove your point for you, it's yours. So it's up to you, either prove my argument isn't valid with genuine reasoning or prove your point is valid. You have currently done niether, making your unfounded assertion that I have not supported my claims rather ironic and hypocritical.
How do you figure?

If you look at it objectively, you'll realize that your argument depends on a number of baseless assumptions. For instance, it seems like your argument depends on a sort of "consistency trap" involving Biblical inerrancy; but most Christians don't claim that the Bible is inerrant in the first place.

Also, while it's hardly important, I must point out it's innacurate to say my interpretation of the messianic prophicies. Everything I've said is supported in Judiasm.
There are a range of opinions in Judaism on every matter including this one; you've picked one opinion to suit your argument.

And in any case, this approach is silly. There's a word for a Jew whose interpretation of Messianic prophecies points to Jesus being the Messiah: a Christian. If you restrict yourself to non-Christian interpretations of these prophecies, of course you won't come to the conclusion that Jesus is the Messiah; the outcome is a result of your initial assumptions.
 

Humanistheart

Well-Known Member
I did immediately following..

Is that what that was sopposed to be?

Ha! If this isn't the pot calling the kettle black, I don't know what is..

So you choose to respond with an old phrase rather than offering the support for your claims I asked for. Well this is going to be a slow, dull dialogue between us.

There are plenty of other sources: off the top of my head, there's non-canonical gospels, oral tradition, the Book of Mormon, purported direct divine inspiration... all of these contain information about Jesus' character, actions and words. Whether they're correct or not is another question, but it applies just as much to the Bible as it does to them...

And you're reasoning that, weather correct or not, they are all valid to jesus' life is? Also note that I'm focusing on disproving the christian god; we've already had a thread where the Mormon god was disproved. One god at a time please.

Same argument applies. It's perfectly valid in many Christian contexts to simply say that Jesus is God and the ancient Jews got some details wrong. I suspect it's also valid in many more Christian contexts to say that Jesus is God, the ancient Jews were right, and you're just mis-interpreting their prophecies...

Then by all means argue one messianic prophecy succesfully that applies to jesus.

I'm grateful that you're here to tell me what I mean to say. :sarcastic..

Always happy to help.

Neither is giving an argument for one thing and then claiming it proves something else...

I did no such thing. You misunderstood my argument, as I already explained. That's hardly my fault.

How do you figure?.

I listed arguments, you've failed to list relevant ones that counter said arguments. Seems fairly straight forward.

If you look at it objectively, you'll realize that your argument depends on a number of baseless assumptions. For instance, it seems like your argument depends on a sort of "consistency trap" involving Biblical inerrancy; but most Christians don't claim that the Bible is inerrant in the first place..

Most, but some do. At any rate, they believe jesus is the messiah. Fine, but that belief is usually claimed to be based on the bible. Showing this to be innacurate is a valid responce.


There are a range of opinions in Judaism on every matter including this one; you've picked one opinion to suit your argument..

Oh, could you grace us with an example of a jewish sect or school of thinking that views the messianic prophicies differently than I described? At any rate, I did preface that before with it hardly matters, and you missed my point entirely. You said it was an interpretation exclusive to ME, and as you noted in this post I'm responding too that is not the case, making your assertion that I was the only one who held those views false. And even if it was exclusive to me, lets not get into fallacies of numbers. If only one person thought the earth was round it would still be round.

And in any case, this approach is silly. There's a word for a Jew whose interpretation of Messianic prophecies points to Jesus being the Messiah: a Christian. .

That' not entirely accurate, but even it it were that's hardly relevant now is it.

If you restrict yourself to non-Christian interpretations of these prophecies, of course you won't come to the conclusion that Jesus is the Messiah; the outcome is a result of your initial assumptions.

Many of the prophicies christians claim to point to jesus weren't prophicies at all. Their snippets from various portions of the jewish works. Most of them don't need 'interpreting' they are entirely straight forward.

I've listed why jesus wasn't a messiah, the bases for the christian god concept. Do you or do you not have a counter argument?
 
Last edited:

9-10ths_Penguin

1/10 Subway Stalinist
Premium Member
And you're reasoning that, weather correct or not, they are all valid to jesus' life is?
No, I'm not. I'm arguing against your idea that Christians have nothing besides the Bible on which to base their opinions of Jesus.

Also note that I'm focusing on disproving the christian god; we've already had a thread where the Mormon god was disproved. One god at a time please.
Mormons are Christians. If your argument doesn't address Mormons' beliefs, it doesn't address the entirety of Christian belief.

Then by all means argue one messianic prophecy succesfully that applies to jesus.
I don't need to. They're not relevant to the question of disproving that Jesus is God.

I did no such thing. You misunderstood my argument, as I already explained. That's hardly my fault.
All you've argued so far is that Jesus doesn't fulfil Jewish messianic prophecies. You jump from there to claiming you've proven that Jesus isn't God. There's a disconnect, and I haven't misunderstood it.

Most, but some do. At any rate, they believe jesus is the messiah. Fine, but that belief is usually claimed to be based on the bible. Showing this to be innacurate is a valid responce.
The Bible, the New Testament anyway, explicitly claims that Jesus is the Messiah. This is separate to anything it also claims about Jesus meeting messianic prophecy.

And only Sola Scriptura Protestants claim to base their entire faith on the Bible. The majority of Christians, including all Catholic and Orthodox churches, also cite "Holy Tradition" as a source of doctrine. Even if you throw away the Bible, this tradition would be enough for the majority of Christians to point to Jesus as the Messiah.

Oh, could you grace us with an example of a jewish sect or school of thinking that views the messianic prophicies differently than I described? At any rate, I did preface that before with it hardly matters, and you missed my point entirely. You said it was an interpretation exclusive to ME, as you've aI've wrote, making your assumption that I was the only one who held those views false.
You're reading things into my posts that I never said. I never once claimed that your interpretation was yours alone. It's the interpretation that you were presenting to us, and as such it's quite reasonable to call it "yours". "Your interpretation" does not necessarily mean "the interpretation that you and you alone came up with".

That' not entirely accurate, but even it it were that's hardly relevant now is it.

If you restrict yourself to non-Christian interpretations of these prophecies, of course you won't come to the conclusion that Jesus is the Messiah; the outcome is a result of your initial assumptions.
If we restrict ourselves to non-Christian interpretations of Jewish messianic prophecies, we would also come to the conclusion that the Messiah is not God, making Jewish messianic prophecies irrelevant to answering the question of whether any person who we have decided is not the Jewish messiah is or is not God.

Many of the prophicies christians claim to point to jesus weren't prophicies at all. Their snippets from various portions of the jewish works. Most of them don't need 'interpreting' they are entirely straight forward.

I've listed why jesus wasn't a messiah, the basese for the christian god concept. Do you or do you not have a counter argument?
Not to the idea that Jesus isn't the Messiah. I agree that the New Testament interprets the Old Testament in a way that I think is inconsistent. I see major problems with the New Testament claims that Jesus fulfilled Jewish messianic prophecies. What I'm arguing is that none of this has any bearing whatsoever on whether Jesus is God or not, and probably don't even have any bearing on whether Christians are justified in believing Jesus to be the Messiah.
 

Humanistheart

Well-Known Member
No, I'm not. I'm arguing against your idea that Christians have nothing besides the Bible on which to base their opinions of Jesus.


Mormons are Christians. If your argument doesn't address Mormons' beliefs, it doesn't address the entirety of Christian belief.


I don't need to. They're not relevant to the question of disproving that Jesus is God.


All you've argued so far is that Jesus doesn't fulfil Jewish messianic prophecies. You jump from there to claiming you've proven that Jesus isn't God. There's a disconnect, and I haven't misunderstood it.


The Bible, the New Testament anyway, explicitly claims that Jesus is the Messiah. This is separate to anything it also claims about Jesus meeting messianic prophecy.

And only Sola Scriptura Protestants claim to base their entire faith on the Bible. The majority of Christians, including all Catholic and Orthodox churches, also cite "Holy Tradition" as a source of doctrine. Even if you throw away the Bible, this tradition would be enough for the majority of Christians to point to Jesus as the Messiah.


You're reading things into my posts that I never said. I never once claimed that your interpretation was yours alone. It's the interpretation that you were presenting to us, and as such it's quite reasonable to call it "yours". "Your interpretation" does not necessarily mean "the interpretation that you and you alone came up with".


If we restrict ourselves to non-Christian interpretations of Jewish messianic prophecies, we would also come to the conclusion that the Messiah is not God, making Jewish messianic prophecies irrelevant to answering the question of whether any person who we have decided is not the Jewish messiah is or is not God.


Not to the idea that Jesus isn't the Messiah. I agree that the New Testament interprets the Old Testament in a way that I think is inconsistent. I see major problems with the New Testament claims that Jesus fulfilled Jewish messianic prophecies. What I'm arguing is that none of this has any bearing whatsoever on whether Jesus is God or not, and probably don't even have any bearing on whether Christians are justified in believing Jesus to be the Messiah.

Ah, I think I see what your saying now and believe I can give an adequate responce that will satisfy both of us. I do agree with some of your points but disagree with your conclusion. Also I think we may have simply been misunderstanding each other on several issues. I will post the responce tonight after work, and apologize for not being able to give this post the time it deserves at the moment.
 

Archer

Well-Known Member
Psalm 22

1 My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?
Why are you so far from saving me,
so far from the words of my groaning? 2 O my God, I cry out by day, but you do not answer,
by night, and am not silent.
3 Yet you are enthroned as the Holy One;
you are the praise of Israel. [a]
4 In you our fathers put their trust;
they trusted and you delivered them.
5 They cried to you and were saved;
in you they trusted and were not disappointed.
6 But I am a worm and not a man,
scorned by men and despised by the people.
7 All who see me mock me;
they hurl insults, shaking their heads:
8 "He trusts in the LORD;
let the LORD rescue him.
Let him deliver him,
since he delights in him."
9 Yet you brought me out of the womb;
you made me trust in you
even at my mother's breast.
10 From birth I was cast upon you;
from my mother's womb you have been my God.
11 Do not be far from me,
for trouble is near
and there is no one to help.
12 Many bulls surround me;
strong bulls of Bashan encircle me.
13 Roaring lions tearing their prey
open their mouths wide against me.
14 I am poured out like water,
and all my bones are out of joint.
My heart has turned to wax;
it has melted away within me.
15 My strength is dried up like a potsherd,
and my tongue sticks to the roof of my mouth;
you lay me [b] in the dust of death.
16 Dogs have surrounded me;
a band of evil men has encircled me,
they have pierced [c] my hands and my feet.
17 I can count all my bones;
people stare and gloat over me.
18 They divide my garments among them
and cast lots for my clothing.
19 But you, O LORD, be not far off;
O my Strength, come quickly to help me.
20 Deliver my life from the sword,
my precious life from the power of the dogs.
21 Rescue me from the mouth of the lions;
save [d] me from the horns of the wild oxen.
22 I will declare your name to my brothers;
in the congregation I will praise you.
23 You who fear the LORD, praise him!
All you descendants of Jacob, honor him!
Revere him, all you descendants of Israel!
24 For he has not despised or disdained
the suffering of the afflicted one;
he has not hidden his face from him
but has listened to his cry for help.
25 From you comes the theme of my praise in the great assembly;
before those who fear you [e] will I fulfill my vows.
26 The poor will eat and be satisfied;
they who seek the LORD will praise him—
may your hearts live forever!
27 All the ends of the earth
will remember and turn to the LORD,
and all the families of the nations
will bow down before him,
28 for dominion belongs to the LORD
and he rules over the nations.
29 All the rich of the earth will feast and worship;
all who go down to the dust will kneel before him—
those who cannot keep themselves alive.
30 Posterity will serve him;
future generations will be told about the Lord.
31 They will proclaim his righteousness
to a people yet unborn—
for he has done it.


Here is a link to Hebrew:)


Psalm 22:1 Hebrew Texts and Analysis

Yes, some of the Prophecies were of the 2nd coming. Why do I not say I believe they were? Because all of the old testament Prophecies have yet to be fulfilled. So I know not believe!

After a study of the Old Testament prophesies and the parallelism some of them share with Revelations it is pretty easy to draw this conclusion.

Humanistheart, keep it up:) this allows me to get some of the dust off of the olde brain:yes:
 
Last edited:
Top