There ain't no Jesus here.

[rosends]

His name was Yehoshua/Yeshua, therefore there are multiple references within the Tanakh...

the OP asked if one had ever read the text " without reading Jesus into it?" You answered by saying that you have read Jesus into it.

There are no references to Jesus in the text, only your interpretation that certain textual moments can only/best be explained by invoking the idea of Jesus. This falls under the second statement in the OP: " where you had no choice but to read Jesus there for lack of better explanation of the passage."

 

[Tumah]

In that case Yeshua is from God , the real god that existed long before the OT .
The prophet of Islam
Your wish granted , didn't make sense that it could be the same to be honest .
The continuation of my gods laws can be seen throughout the western world and continues to evolve within UN resolutions
I like living in 2016 is today's date
Yours ?

Nope.

 

[Tumah]

the OP asked if one had ever read the text " without reading Jesus into it?" You answered by saying that you have read Jesus into it.

There are no references to Jesus in the text, only your interpretation that certain textual moments can only/best be explained by invoking the idea of Jesus. This falls under the second statement in the OP: " where you had no choice but to read Jesus there for lack of better explanation of the passage."

Its not by accident that I didn't respond to him...

 

[wizanda]

Its not by accident that I didn't respond to him...

Yeah you like being rude, we get it....Plus both of you have shown so far you're incapable of comprehending.

It is all explained on this site previously, and by the prophets.

Shalom

 

[InChrist]

Any Christians out there, ever tried reading the TaNaCH without reading Jesus into it?
Just reading what it says and taking it at face value without the lens of the NT?

I'd be interested to know how you fared and where you had no choice but to read Jesus there for lack of better explanation of the passage.

Even if I really tried, now that Jesus Christ has been revealed, I'm sure I couldn't read the TaNaCh without seeing Jesus throughout. His name, Jesus, Yeshua, Y'shua means “ Salvation, the Lord Is Salvation.” and He said of those scriptures...'for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me' (John 5:39).

 

[psychoslice]

Yes I believe the NT was simply made to sound as if it was prophesied by the OT, where in truth the OT was not speaking about Jesus at all.

 

[Ingledsva]

...

Sometimes ponder if the New Testament is even totally made up by the Jews or YHVH, as it fits so cleverly with the prophetic text, it is beyond normal comprehension, and takes a Bible word search to realize how it is put together.

I believe it fits so cleverly because it was written - after the fact, - with the stories of Jesus fudged to make him appear to fit the prophecies, - and beyond, - trinity/godman.

And mistakes were made as shown by the "virgin" birth they gave him, - because they misunderstood Isaiah, = no virgin.

And that "Jesus bodily rising from the grave" from the idea of "rising from Sheol" at the Final Judgment.

And they have "Lucifer" being thrown down from heaven, - after a misreading of a Babylonian King being thrown down.

They misunderstood and created their own commentary, and stories.

*

 

[Tumah]

Even if I really tried, now that Jesus Christ has been revealed, I'm sure I couldn't read the TaNaCh without seeing Jesus throughout. His name, Jesus, Yeshua, Y'shua means “ Salvation, the Lord Is Salvation.” and He said of those scriptures...'for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me' (John 5:39).

That's too bad then.

 

[SpeaksForTheTrees]

the OP asked if one had ever read the text " without reading Jesus into it?" You answered by saying that you have read Jesus into it.

There are no references to Jesus in the text, only your interpretation that certain textual moments can only/best be explained by invoking the idea of Jesus. This falls under the second statement in the OP: " where you had no choice but to read Jesus there for lack of better explanation of the passage."

The God of Christians , is not the same as Judaism . Jesus is Jewish but was sent by the christian god , Anu supreme ruler of heaven ,king of Gods , Lord of the constelations is God of christians . Jesus is manifestation of Ilabrat
Your God is stolen from the East , from nations pre sumarian .
The God of Christians , the trinity has far more in common with Hinduism & Braham & manifestations there of.
aka Allah

 

[wizanda]

trinity/godman.

Well spotted, and you'd be correct in a sense, as the made up gospel of John creates the idea of the trinity.... Paul's writings create the idea of him being the image of God.

Yet take into account Yeshua warned this would happen in the synoptic gospels, that those who'd come after would deceive many.

Daniel warns the same thing, the Abomination of Desolation is established by the Messiah but not by his own doing.

Habakkuk warns that tho the Just shall live by his Faith, the city built upon bloodshed happens after.

And mistakes were made as shown by the "virgin" birth they gave him, - because they misunderstood Isaiah, = no virgin.

Now this is from the gospel writers, and there are numerous errors throughout their testimony, adding bits they thought were befitting, and maybe there was some substance to them, and they should have left it at what they thought occurred, rather than dramatizing things.

Yet it doesn't mean the whole of their testimonies are made up in that same manner, some of it is shoddy; the bits i refer to by Yeshua have nothing to do with the mainstream view we've been shown, yet the bits that are not so simple, that interlink prophetic statements throughout the Tanakh.

 

[Jedster]

Yes I believe the NT was simply made to sound as if it was prophesied by the OT, where in truth the OT was not speaking about Jesus at all.

Yes, it is easy to prophesy after an event.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

And mistakes were made as shown by the "virgin" birth they gave him, - because they misunderstood Isaiah, = no virgin.

To be fair, they were quoting from the Septuagint, which is a Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible that dates back to the 3rd century BC. So if it's wrong, blame the Jews who translated it into Greek, long before Christianity even existed. It was them who translated "almah" as "parthenos" (which means "virgin").

 

[Tumah]

To be fair, they were quoting from the Septuagint, which is a Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible that dates back to the 3rd century BC. So if it's wrong, blame the Jews who translated it into Greek, long before Christianity even existed. It was them who translated "almah" as "parthenos" (which means "virgin").

Just keep in mind that the Septuagint story only related to the Pentateuch. Prophets and writing were translated later by whomever.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Just keep in mind that the Septuagint story only related to the Pentateuch. Prophets and writing were translated later by whomever.

It says it was completed by 132 BC, though.

 

[SpeaksForTheTrees]

Let Adapa the Earthling to Nibiru be brought! So did Anu his decision declare.

By the decision Enlil was not pleased: Whoever of this would have thought,

That by a Primitive Worker fashioning, like us the being would become,

With knowledge, endowed, between Heaven and Earth will travel!

On Nibiru the waters of long life he will drink, the food of long life eat,

Like one of us Anunnaki shall the one of Earth become!


By the decision of Anu Enki too was not pleased; sullen was his face after Anu had spoken.

After Enlil had spoken, with Enlil his brother Enki agreed:

Indeed, who of this would have thought! So to the others did Enki say.

The brothers sat and contemplated; Ninmah with them was also deliberating.

The command of Anu cannot be avoided! to them she said.

Adapa
“Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live forever; Therefore the Lord God sent him forth from the garden of Eden”(Genesis 3:22-23)

 

[Tumah]

It says it was completed by 132 BC, though.

Yeah, I'm just saying that the later books don't necessarily have the same universal approval as the earlier ones did.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Yeah, I'm just saying that the later books don't necessarily have the same universal approval as the earlier ones did.

Okay, but I'm just pointing out that it's not something Christians made up or mistranslated.

 

[Flankerl]

Even if I really tried, now that Jesus Christ has been revealed, I'm sure I couldn't read the TaNaCh without seeing Jesus throughout. His name, Jesus, Yeshua, Y'shua means “ Salvation, the Lord Is Salvation.” and He said of those scriptures...'for in them you think you have eternal life; and these are they which testify of Me' (John 5:39).

Jokes on you, all these references are about me.

Yeah I know I haven't fulfilled them all, but this is just my first visit. There will be more.

To be fair, they were quoting from the Septuagint, which is a Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible that dates back to the 3rd century BC. So if it's wrong, blame the Jews who translated it into Greek, long before Christianity even existed. It was them who translated "almah" as "parthenos" (which means "virgin").

Yeah by Hellenic Jews.
Which pretty much says everything one needs to know about it.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Yeah by Hellenic Jews.
Which pretty much says everything one needs to know about it.

No, not really. What does it say?

 

[wizanda]

Yeah I know I haven't fulfilled them all, but this is just my first visit. There will be more.

Dan 9:26 After the sixty-two weeks the Messiah will be cut off, and will have nothing. The people of the prince who come will destroy the city and the sanctuary. Its end will be with a flood, and war will be even to the end. Desolations are determined.
Zec 12:10 I will pour on David’s house, and on the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplication; and they will look to me whom they have pierced; and they shall mourn for him, as one mourns for his only son, and will grieve bitterly for him, as one grieves for his firstborn.
Isa 53:9 They made his grave with the wicked, and with a rich man in his death; although he had done no violence, nor was any deceit in his mouth.

Clearly you're not the Messiah, and you've not been put to death....So sorry you don't qualify, and to assume the Tanakh is a joke, explains why you don't comprehend it.

the OP asked if one had ever read the text " without reading Jesus into it?"

That wasn't a response to the OP, if you check; it was in response to someone's faulty line of questioning.