Tumah
Veteran Member
Of Jesus' anything.What NT claim do you refer to?
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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Of Jesus' anything.What NT claim do you refer to?
I don't even.No to save himself , would of been to force Gods will on that day if he had of saved himself would of been effectively end of human free will .
It was humanity , not the Jewish per se that crucified him .Is a subjective rejection of god the Crucifixion ?
Even in face of death , he showed no weakness , also he did not force his will on anyone .Is Free religion
Was not the way of Jesus to force anything on anyone even in face of death
Athiesm is acceptable to my philosophy
Aleichem ShalomShalom aleichem SFTT,
I am sorry that I used the word prejudice. For me it only means that we are all conditioned by our earlier experiences so we have a very particular point of view, and emotional reactions toward certain subjects. I hope to be a better person as my life progresses, and hope that you can forgive my present imperfections.
I agree with you that there are things in Jewish Law that are not appropriate and could be removed, while others-- truly from God-- should remain. Not every Jew will agree with me, but, in my opinion, we all have the right to believe as we choose. If we are to end hatred and violence in the world, isn't it a good idea to show respect for others, no matter what their nationalities, religions, or ethnicities? Aren't we all sharing this same good Earth that we live upon?
It's my hope that we can all find ways to live together in peace and understanding. Afterall, isn't that the basic essence of all religions?
Peace my brother.
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.
Are you asking a theological, historic, or apologetic question concerning Jesus claims?Of Jesus' anything.
My point is that Jesus disobeyed the law of the Sabbath in the NT.
That's silly.Very interesting question ^ above ^.
Who fits the bill, so to speak, at Isaiah 11:3-5 other than Jesus ?
Who would be the ' anointed one ' ( Messiah/ Mashiach ) other than Jesus at Daniel 9:26
It could be any anointed person. Kings, prophets and priests were all anointed. You can actually tell that its not specifically talking about the Messiah because it doesn't use the ה prefix which would denote a specific known X (in this case, a specific known anointed person). Without that letter, it just means, one person among the people that are anointed. So it could mean anyone.
You're only reading it that way, in order to get try to fit Jesus into the text. But there's a few problems:Daniel 9:24-25 with its full 7-year periods or weeks of years:
Each week, so to speak, was 7 years long. There would be 7 plus 62 of such weeks, thus making a total of 69 weeks of years.
That equals 483 years. The counting point, or when the period began, was when Nehemiah 2:1-3; Nehemiah 2:4-6; Nehemiah 2:7-8 arrived in Jerusalem and began to rebuild the city.
Persian history establishes that date as being 455 BCE
Jesus is the one who came as the Anointed One or Messiah 483 years later.
1. The 7 and 62 weeks are clearly distinct calculations. There's no reason to put them together. In fact, the presence of the ה prefix in verse 26 on the "sixty two weeks" indicates that the 62 weeks are a separate entity.
2. There is absolutely no reason to assume that Nehemiah 2 is the starting point of the prophecy anymore than Ezra 1,6 or 7- except that you want to fit Jesus into it.
3. If you did the math, 455 BCE + 483 = 28 CE. What happened in 28 CE?
Essentially, what you're doing here is reverse engineering. You have some info and you want to get it into Daniel, so you look for any other verses that will get you closer to the answer you want to come out with. But we are talking about when we don't know anything about Jesus. Without Jesus, all we have is context to understand what's going on. The context of the passage is Daniel asking for info about Israel, Jerusalem and the Temple. He is at the end of the 70 year Babylonian exile and is wondering what's going on with the promised redemption. He prays to G-d. G-d sends an angel with a response. Presumably the response will be information about what he asked. He didn't ask about a Messiah, and unless you read it into the text, there's no mention of one. Its just a prophecy about Israel, Jerusalem and the Temple. When they will be returned to their previous states, and eventually when they will once again be destroyed.
Specifically, the NY claims that rely on Tanach verses to substantiate their claims of Jesus authenticity as god or prophet.Are you asking a theological, historic, or apologetic question concerning Jesus claims?
I think there are two different ways of looking at at Tanach: as texts in their own right (sans Jesus) and as confirmation of Jesus' authenticity (from a more eisegetical perspective). IOW, I think there are some prophecies that can be seen to have been fulfilled -- not literalistically, but in a broader sense -- by Jesus, but I think it's a huge mistake to use that to try to proselytize Jews. The point I'm trying to make is that it's disingenuous to hold Jesus to the paradigm for messiah as presented by ancient Judaism. He didn't fulfill those prophecies exactly. What all Christians acknowledge is that Jesus fulfilled the prophecies according to a new paradigm that effectively changed what it means for God to save us.Specifically, the NY claims that rely on Tanach verses to substantiate their claims of Jesus authenticity as god or prophet.
Are you referring to Luke 6:1-2 ?_______
The true purpose of the Sabbath Law was made void, Not by Jesus, but by the Jewish religious leaders placing un-necessary burdens on the people to their traditions, instead of having the Sabbath serve men to the honor of God.- Matthew 15:3; Matthew 15:6; Matthew 15:9; Matthew 23:2-4; Mark 2:27
Those false religious leaders forbid catching a flea on the Sabbath because to them that was considered as hunting !
A suffering person could Not be helped unless death threatened. They missed the point about showing ' mercy '.
They wanted to have the 'letter' of their customs or traditions followed instead the the 'spirit' of the Constitution of the Mosaic Law.
Jesus observed the Law, Not as the corrupted Pharisees, but as God directed.
Jesus knew it was lawful to do fine things on the Sabbath - Matthew 12:12 - following the ' spirit' of the Law as God intended it to be so.
Rubbing gains in one's hands to eat was Not ' harvesting and threshing ' on the Sabbath.
So, Jesus did Not disobey the Law of the Sabbath, but it was the Rabbinic Sabbath restrictions which was disobeying the whole system of Sabbaths.
And what I am saying is that this type of eisegesis is essentially reverse engineering the text in order to make it conform with a new idea not present in them. In other words, belief in Jesus as the messiah is not predicated on proof texts but on his say so, and then the Tanach is reworked to substantiate that claim. To take it a step further, the NT is taken as factual on Paul's et. al. say so and then the Tanach is made to conform with their works. Doesn't that seem like putting the cart before the horse?I think there are two different ways of looking at at Tanach: as texts in their own right (sans Jesus) and as confirmation of Jesus' authenticity (from a more eisegetical perspective). IOW, I think there are some prophecies that can be seen to have been fulfilled -- not literalistically, but in a broader sense -- by Jesus, but I think it's a huge mistake to use that to try to proselytize Jews. The point I'm trying to make is that it's disingenuous to hold Jesus to the paradigm for messiah as presented by ancient Judaism. He didn't fulfill those prophecies exactly. What all Christians acknowledge is that Jesus fulfilled the prophecies according to a new paradigm that effectively changed what it means for God to save us.
Not God , manifestation there of , subjectively in touch with rauchSpecifically, the NY claims that rely on Tanach verses to substantiate their claims of Jesus authenticity as god or prophet.
Did moses really part the red sea , noah really get all those animal on a diy ark .Did she physically become a pillar of saltSpecifically, the NY claims that rely on Tanach verses to substantiate their claims of Jesus authenticity as god or prophet.
Sounds like your describing evolution theory reverse engineering actually starts with a finished product of humans then reverses , still they can not make life from non life chemicals .And what I am saying is that this type of eisegesis is essentially reverse engineering the text in order to make it conform with a new idea not present in them. In other words, belief in Jesus as the messiah is not predicated on proof texts but on his say so, and then the Tanach is reworked to substantiate that claim. To take it a step further, the NT is taken as factual on Paul's et. al. say so and then the Tanach is made to conform with their works. Doesn't that seem like putting the cart before the horse?
Well, you're right, of course. That's what it is. However, that's essentially what early Xy was doing. You have to remember that Matthew's community basically thought of themselves as the "true Israel."And what I am saying is that this type of eisegesis is essentially reverse engineering the text in order to make it conform with a new idea not present in them.
Essentially correct, in that the texts, themselves do not name Jesus, and do not conceptualize righteousness in the same way Jesus does. However, the concept of messiah is present in the texts, so it's not like the whole concept was dreamed up out of whole cloth. I think Jesus as Messiah is more than just "on his say so." There must have been some prevailing thinking along those lines very, very early on in the Movement -- by Jews -- in order for Mark and Q to be written in the way they were, "reverse-engineering the prophecies, so to speak.In other words, belief in Jesus as the messiah is not predicated on proof texts but on his say so, and then the Tanach is reworked to substantiate that claim.
I don't think it's as cut and dried or as easy as that. Remember, Paul was preaching less than 18 months after the Jesus Event, so there must have been, as I say, some prevailing thinking along those lines that Paul bought into. But who knows what that historical source was.To take it a step further, the NT is taken as factual on Paul's et. al. say so and then the Tanach is made to conform with their works. Doesn't that seem like putting the cart before the horse?
So not only are you giving up on your insistence that you won't speak about Judaism anymore, but you are copying and pasting material which shows a huge lack of knowledge about gematria. B=2 not 2000. A=1, not 1000, so the gematria of the word is 913 and the rest of your display is therefore completely wrong.B-R-A-Sh-I-TH bara Elohim
Taking the numerical powers
B= 2000
R= 200
A= 1000
SH = 300
I = 10
Th = 400
Total 3910 years from beginning to Christ birth
B = Ben the son
R= Rauch the spirit
A = AB the father
Ra****h = the beginning
הבן , רוח , אבא , טריניטי , מושלם
בהתחלה אלוהים ראה שישראל לקבל את החוק
אני אבחר בתולה ראויה ישו נולד וקראת אליה מבורך
והיית סוגד שם מי הראשון שלי נולד הראשון שלי הוא ישו
כאשר האדון מגיע מי שם הוא ישוע לך שעוד סוגדים
How could it at all relate to jesus. Loads of people have chastised the wicked and helped the poor. But I don't recall jesus ever smiting anyone with the breath of his lips. And of course, about the same person the next verses are written and that stuff simply hasn't happened.Very interesting question ^ above ^.
Who fits the bill, so to speak, at Isaiah 11:3-5 other than Jesus ?
Well, since Jesus was never anointed with the sheme hamishcha, the anointing oil, it couldn't be he to whom the text was referring.Who would be the ' anointed one ' ( Messiah/ Mashiach ) other than Jesus at Daniel 9:26
In English gematria A = 6So not only are you giving up on your insistence that you won't speak about Judaism anymore, but you are copying and pasting material which shows a huge lack of knowledge about gematria. B=2 not 2000. A=1, not 1000, so the gematria of the word is 913 and the rest of your display is therefore completely wrong.
Didn't want to walk away feeling I needed to warn people ,you are hated just because of who you are and these laws are the proof .So not only are you giving up on your insistence that you won't speak about Judaism anymore, but you are copying and pasting material which shows a huge lack of knowledge about gematria. B=2 not 2000. A=1, not 1000, so the gematria of the word is 913 and the rest of your display is therefore completely wrong.
I am replying to this so that you can't go back and change it.In English gematria A = 6
According to the evilest man in the world A=1000
Using the evilest man in the worlds gematria I acquired scripture , nice .