• 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?

rosends

Well-Known Member
Is everything done in the law based on whats on the books? Judges have to follow parameters but decisions aren't just based off the books they are also based on precedent and common sense.
Then this just shows, again, that you don't understand Jewish law. You should just accept that fact.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
Except you said that they were ALL fulfilled already. Are you a robot?

The Messiah would first come to do A, B, C, and then X, Y, and Z. Does the Old Testament truly predict a second advent of the Messiah? | GotQuestions.org

All in all, the Hebrew Scriptures indicate that the Promised One would appear, be cut off, and then reappear in victory. The first advent has occurred; the second is still future. Both the New and Old Testaments predict a second advent of the Messiah.
 

rosends

Well-Known Member
Why would during the time of Jesus all of the halacha be based off the Old Testament?
You are so efficient that you have 2 major problems in the space of 1 question!

1. Why wouldn't it all be - do you have any evidence that it wasn't? Jewish law would be based on the Jewish religious interaction with the divine. Why would you think that it source is anything else?
2. But who says all of it was based on the Jewish written text?

so are you a robot, a troll or a child? I'm genuinely curious.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
You are so efficient that you have 2 major problems in the space of 1 question!

1. Why wouldn't it all be - do you have any evidence that it wasn't? Jewish law would be based on the Jewish religious interaction with the divine. Why would you think that it source is anything else?
2. But who says all of it was based on the Jewish written text?

so are you a robot, a troll or a child? I'm genuinely curious.

Laws aren't just based off of what's on the books but on precedent and common sense. Common sense comes from God. What pastors and priests talk about comes from the Scriptures but they don't use the Scriptures to determine who is a close relative or not.
 

rosends

Well-Known Member
Laws aren't just based off of what's on the books but on precedent and common sense. Common sense comes from God. What pastors and priests talk about comes from the Scriptures but they don't use the Scriptures to determine who is a close relative or not.
You keep saying the same things but that doesn't make them any more right. Everything you say in this post just screams, "I don't know what I'm talking about, especially as it relates to Jewish law!"

So why don't you try talking about something relevant that you know?
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
You keep saying the same things but that doesn't make them any more right. Everything you say in this post just screams, "I don't know what I'm talking about, especially as it relates to Jewish law!"

So why don't you try talking about something relevant that you know?

Are you referring to the post where I asked if halacha is from the Old Testament or rabbinic tradition?
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
And this contradicts you earlier claim. It is pretty simple.

The concept of the first and second coming are underlied in the Old Testament. Does the Old Testament truly predict a second advent of the Messiah? | GotQuestions.org

All in all, the Hebrew Scriptures indicate that the Promised One would appear, be cut off, and then reappear in victory. The first advent has occurred; the second is still future. Both the New and Old Testaments predict a second advent of the Messiah.
 

Batya

Always Forward
But he cried out on the cross.
Matthew 27:46
Mark 15:34​

In Isaiah 53 (and Isaiah 42) the servant suffers silently.
Has Israel suffered silently? I've never thought if it this way exactly, so I'm curious to hear your thoughts.
I think that in regard to Yeshua (I know you don't think that's who it's talking about, but anyway...), it would not so much be saying he never raised his voice, but that he did not come declaring himself to be the Messiah.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
And you contradicted yourself quite explicitly. Are you trying to convince me or yourself?

I said that Jesus fulfilled all of the prophecies and some will be fulfilled at his second coming. The Messiah would first come to do A, B, C, and then X, Y, and Z, is why the two are not contradictory. I didn't mean that Jesus wouldn't do certain things later.
 

dybmh

דניאל יוסף בן מאיר הירש
Has Israel suffered silently?
The exile in Babylon? Wouldn't that work and fit in the context of the later chapters?
I think that in regard to Yeshua (I know you don't think that's who it's talking about, but anyway...), it would not so much be saying he never raised his voice, but that he did not come declaring himself to be the Messiah.
Can you make a case for salvation on the cross if Isaiah 53:5 is not taken as literally true?
Do the verses Isaiah 42:1-4 match the gospel account?

Then, take a look at verse 6. Can you make that verse comprehensible if God is the Messiah?

Then, verse 8... God does not share his glory... but the book of John says, glorify the son and the father is glorified...

Do you see what I mean? The book of Isaiah does not match the gospel.
 

rosends

Well-Known Member
I said that Jesus fulfilled all of the prophecies and some will be fulfilled at his second coming. The Messiah would first come to do A, B, C, and then X, Y, and Z, is why the two are not contradictory. I didn't mean that Jesus wouldn't do certain things later.
Again, you said,

"Jesus FULFILLED ALL the prophecies"

and then you said

"some WILL BE fulfilled at his second coming."

If some WILL BE, then you can't say that all were already fulfilled.

You're putting me on about this, right? You can't miss the contradiction and still have the intelligence required to turn a computer on.
 

Skywalker

Well-Known Member
The exile in Babylon? Wouldn't that work and fit in the context of the later chapters?

Can you make a case for salvation on the cross if Isaiah 53:5 is not taken as literally true?
Do the verses Isaiah 42:1-4 match the gospel account?

Then, take a look at verse 6. Can you make that verse comprehensible if God is the Messiah?

Then, verse 8... God does not share his glory... but the book of John says, glorify the son and the father is glorified...

Do you see what I mean? The book of Isaiah does not match the gospel.

Isaiah 42:1-4 calls Jesus the servant like Isaiah 53, and says that the Spirit of the Lord is upon him. Jesus didn't resist arrest. The Messiah will bring forth judgement in the end times.
 

dybmh

דניאל יוסף בן מאיר הירש
Isaiah 42:1-4 calls Jesus the servant like Isaiah 53, and says that the Spirit of the Lord is upon him. Jesus didn't resist arrest. The Messiah will bring forth judgement in the end times.
Therefore: The suffering servant is an archetype. Any martyr fits.
 
Top