• 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!

Is according to Jews everything God's will?

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
I accept that you "personally" don't know how to understand the Hebrew text, as it was written in a language and in a culture that you don't have first hand knowledge of and that you don't have contact with previous Jewish generations who had been/have been learning, teaching, and living it - thus in your current situation it would be impossible for you to know what Yeshayahu or any other Hebrew writer (past and present) meant/means/ in text they wrote/or have written.

So, that being the case it is best for you to leave it to the us professionals who know it, live it, teach it, and continiously learn it from previous Jewish generations who did the same before. ;)

I'm sure Matthew didn't see this promise in isolation. I believe he read it in the broader context of Isaiah 7-11, one of the key prophetic sections that point toward Jesus as Messiah. In Isaiah 7, he is about to be born; in Isaiah 9, he is already born and declared 'mighty God', the divine king; and in Isaiah 11 he is ruling and reigning in the supernatural power of the Spirit. As Matthew looked back at these prophecies, it would have been apparent that these chapters were linked together and that the promises of a worldwide, glorious reign of the promised Messiah were not yet realized. In Chapter 8, Maher-Slalal-Hash-Baz is born. It seems that for Isaiah's contemporaries, this birth virtually took the place of the birth of Immanuel, leaving this important prophetic announcement without any record of fulfillment for more than seven hundred years. Some people say that if Immanuel's birth was supposed to be a sign for Ahaz, then it wouldn't make sense that it would refer to the birth of Jesus seven centuries later. This fails to account for a few things. First, this was a promise to the house of David as a whole, and promises to Davidic kings often had meaning beyond their own generations. Second, the birth of Maher-Slalal-Hash-Baz seems to take the place of the Immanuel prophecy in terms of the immediate historical context. Third, the prophecy is shrouded in obscurity, and so Matthew could legitimately examine it afresh and seek its deeper meaning. I think Matthew's interpretation was legitimate. He sees the supernatural birth, this Immanuel figure, as part of a larger messianic complex of passages, and he applies this difficult part of scripture with genuine insight to Yeshua.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
That's lovely. The word in Jeremiah ISN'T the word "ha'adam." The verse in question says it refers to grown, male warriors. Try again.

The fall of man is why poisonous plants exist in nature. They were not how things were meant to be. They are not how God intended creation to be. Genesis 3:18-19

Both thorns and thistles it shall bring forth for you,
And you shall eat the herb of the field.
In the sweat of your face you shall eat bread
Till you return to the ground,
For out of it you were taken;
For dust you are,
And to dust you shall return.
 

rosends

Well-Known Member
The fall of man is why poisonous plants exist in nature. They were not how things were meant to be. They are not how God intended creation to be. Genesis 3:18-19
Again, when you are shown to be wrong, you just pivot and say something completely unrelated. So noted.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
That's lovely. The word in Jeremiah ISN'T the word "ha'adam." The verse in question says it refers to grown, male warriors. Try again.

The heart of man being desperately wicked and who can know it is a reference to human nature being sinful. We aren't sinners because we sin we sin because we are sinners.
 

rosends

Well-Known Member
The heart of man being desperately wicked and who can know it is a reference to human nature being sinful. We aren't sinners because we sin we sin because we are sinners.
You are repeating the same errors about "wicked" and ignoring all the contarry information I presented, and then coupling it with some strange claim about being sinners even before we sin. Useless. TFP.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
You are repeating the same errors about "wicked" and ignoring all the contarry information I presented, and then coupling it with some strange claim about being sinners even before we sin. Useless. TFP.

Original sin is supported by the idea that the religious teaching of stop sinning you are no longer a sinner is not biblical. Our hearts are twisted.
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
The Messiah, being God, could not have a biological father. Jesus was born of a virgin because he's God incarnate. Messianic Prophecies Fulfilled by Yeshua
Then Jesus could not have been the Messiah, since, having no bio dad, he was not of the line of David.

You can have the Davidic line, or you can have the virgin birth, but you cannot have both.



Only God is a Savior and Messiah. Nobody else deserves that title.
The Messiah is not God. He will be a man. An ordinary man. There is no need to give him deity or to dress him up in wings or have fire shoot from his mouth or anything. Such things are simply not necessary to his mission of ruling during the messianic era.
 

IndigoChild5559

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.
If the servant is both Israel and the remnant, why can't the servant songs refer to both Israel and the Messiah?
The servant is Israel, as represented by the remnant.

The job of the messiah is to rule during the messianic era, and nothing else.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
Then Jesus could not have been the Messiah, since, having no bio dad, he was not of the line of David.

You can have the Davidic line, or you can have the virgin birth, but you cannot have both.



The Messiah is not God. He will be a man. An ordinary man. There is no need to give him deity or to dress him up in wings or have fire shoot from his mouth or anything. Such things are simply not necessary to his mission of ruling during the messianic era.

It would be impossible for the Messiah to be God and not have a virgin birth. Jesus was born of a virgin because He is God incarnate. God does all things decently and in order.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
The servant is Israel, as represented by the remnant.

The job of the messiah is to rule during the messianic era, and nothing else.

The kingdom of God has both a present and future component. Jesus inaugurates the kingdom at His first coming, but His initial reign is mostly spiritual. His future kingdom will arrive with His Second Coming when He will reign over all creation.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
Then Jesus could not have been the Messiah, since, having no bio dad, he was not of the line of David.

You can have the Davidic line, or you can have the virgin birth, but you cannot have both.



The Messiah is not God. He will be a man. An ordinary man. There is no need to give him deity or to dress him up in wings or have fire shoot from his mouth or anything. Such things are simply not necessary to his mission of ruling during the messianic era.

The Old Testament prophets didn't predict that the Messiah would suffer and die. Yet, Isaiah 53 and other passages foretold a suffering servant. It was completely hidden from the disciples that the Son of Man must fill the role of the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53 before he comes in the power and glory of God's kingdom. In other words, the Old Testament predicted a Messiah and a suffering servant, but not that the Messiah would be the Suffering Servant.
 

dybmh

דניאל יוסף בן מאיר הירש
The kingdom of God has both a present and future component. Jesus inaugurates the kingdom at His first coming, but His initial reign is mostly spiritual. His future kingdom will arrive with His Second Coming when He will reign over all creation.
Without the future component, is he still the Messiah?
 

dybmh

דניאל יוסף בן מאיר הירש
Are you asking if there's a difference between Messiah and Savior titles?
No, I'm curious about the future component of the Kingdom of God. Is the future component required for Jesus to fulfill messianic prophecy?
 

rosends

Well-Known Member
Original sin is supported by the idea that the religious teaching of stop sinning you are no longer a sinner is not biblical. Our hearts are twisted.
Whether you think original sin is supported or not is immaterial. Judaism doesn't and it was being misrepresented by someone you decided to rely on. And maybe your heart is twisted, but I'd like to think mine isn't (and as none of the verses you quoted says that it is, there you have it).
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
Whether you think original sin is supported or not is immaterial. Judaism doesn't and it was being misrepresented by someone you decided to rely on. And maybe your heart is twisted, but I'd like to think mine isn't (and as none of the verses you quoted says that it is, there you have it).

If all of creation was affected when Adam and Eve sinned, wouldn't that mean also that our hearts were affected too?
 
Top