-
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!
Fulfillment of Prophecy in the New Testament
- Thread starter Samael_Khan
- Start date
Ehav4Ever
Well-Known Member
Greetings. Actually, Psalm 22 is not a strong case. You would have to first establish what the Hebrew text defines the terms that are being used and also how it defines an accetable claim. If you start there you won't even be able to get to Psalm 22.
Concerning Isaiah 53. In order to show how that one is not applicable to the NT and Jesus all one has to do is start at Isaiah 1, in Hebrew and read through it all the through to the end. I did a video about this once.
Ehav4Ever
Well-Known Member
I can imagine that Paul will be a lot especially if you include Romans and Hebrews in that. Take your time.
You may want to watch the series called "A Rabbi Cross Examines the NT" by Rabbi Michael Skobac. He started in Matthew is had been going through and is now in Paul's writings.
Here is an example of one of his shows.
Ehav4Ever
Well-Known Member
Also, what is called the LXX is not the original Torah version. That version was lost in history. As you stated the prophets and writings that are know today did not come from Jewish communities.
Ehav4Ever
Well-Known Member
The Jewish text doesn't carry the bias for one simply reason. A larger number of Jews can read the actual Hebrew w/o commentary or midrash. Throughout history, and even in the present, only a small minority of Christians can read the text in Hebrew. Further, the Christian method is to read the Tanakh in light of what is in the NT. As a Jew I can walk in w/o a bias since I have the ability to interact with the text as it was written w/o having to find out what it means, if I want. The average Christian doesn't have this ability - they have to rely on translation which include the commentary in the translation.
Further, the bias exists more on the Christian side because they have the burden of proof I do not. For example, I don't have any historical evidence to prove that the NT is a valid text based on known Jewish authorship and based on proven historical veracity. The Torah requires me, as a Jew, to verify these two elements prior to even hearing what is in the text. I also ask the question of, "The Torah states that when Jews keep the Torah correctly there will always be a group of us who survive." Yet, when we look at the 1st-2nd century Jewish Christians they disappeared off the historical map 2 generations after they started and it isn't clear historically why. For exmaple, there is a modern day messianic Jewish movement but NONE OF THEM can be shown to be descendents of the original Jewish Christians. They further only started in the 1960's from former Reform Jews who were in the phychodelic movement.
These are the kinds of issues that someone making a claim, to Jews, would have to answer for because the Torah requires us to challenge all claims in this way.
Last edited:
Brian2
Veteran Member
Hasn't it? I watched Christians and Jews going in circles and Christians and Baha'is going and circles, and even an 'undecided' going in circles with Christians and Bahai's.
Stalemate. Is that good?
We all had our say and learned things probably. There does not have to be a winner. Interestingly even if there is a winner, the win is hardly ever acknowledged,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,or maybe it is that the win is not seen. I'm sure we are all used to that.
Ehav4Ever
Well-Known Member
I don't think that Harel is talking about winning. Jews don't "normally" get involved in debating Christians on issues like this in order defeat the Christian position, unless it involves winning back lost Jews.
The difference is like one side is describing, in reality, a rock while the other side is describing, in reality, a tree. Yet, both sides say they are describing a tree. The reality is not determined by either side but by the reality. At some point both sides may have to realize that they don't have the common ground to really discuss the issue, especially if there has been a long history of the discussion, and especially if one side has historically paid a very price for being involved in the discussion.
Thus, it often is better for someone to ask a Jew for their views seperately and then ask the Christians for their views seperately.
Brian2
Veteran Member
The common ground is the Hebrew Scriptures. The difference is that Christians see those scriptures pointing to Jesus and Jews do not. So the difference is whether one believes the New Testament or not.
We all have our biases.
But yes, for a neutral party it may be best to ask the Jews and Christians separately for their views.
rational experiences
Veteran Member
1 Corinthians 15:52 - In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.BIBLE VERSES ABOUT JESUS RETURN
Acts 1:9
And after He had said these things, He was lifted up while they were looking on, and a cloud received Him out of their sight.
Matthew 17:5
While he was still speaking, a bright cloud overshadowed them, and behold, a voice out of the cloud said, “This is My beloved Son, with whom I am well-pleased; listen to Him!”
Source: 8 Bible verses about Clouds And Jesus Christ
jesus seen in clouds - Bing images
The story of life sacrificed historic is a story that details a life from a baby, who grew into an aware life attacked in the statements about changes to God.
ST ONE....our planet, its spirits stated to be HOLY by definition of the sciences.
It is a known stigmata human condition for the cell body and the blood to alter its natural holy supported living conditions. Ebola in modern day review is very much a reminder of life in sacrifice and attack.
And humans world wide continue to see SIGNS in the clouds and take photos.
Hence the New Testament details are realised, and it involves changed to ST ONE, by science.
The New Testaments said never give G O D....one a name ever again. Science proves that it had given names to the spirits of God. And it was detailed as a lawful agreement in a Holy life want/ownership to not change God ever again.
So it was a less son. What we mean when we use words and infer word usage to explain rational details of a study and also involving DATA relative to Genetics, to evolution and return of the life/body in reincarnation themes.
Being atmospheric, spirits of the atmosphere, gases and its mass. The theme ICE end of year return/newly formed and newly born, supported an animal and human baby stable life regain/returned healed holiness.
Taken from us by the males who continued to give names to the spirits of the Earth/heavens and changing them. If you quote that a spirit is NOBLE and then alter its NOBLE state in a reaction, then obviously it is no longer NOBLE.
Science however states that it does not own change for it uses the gas spirits by MASS presence. Why they claim they do no change as the NOBLE gas/spirit still remains present.
10 Quick Facts About Helium
Methane is a current atmospheric problem.
Incorruptible would mean a huge release of the gas used for today for cryogenics given to the human belief of a SAINT an incorruptible cellular body, as a causation.
If science promised that it would give your life a deep freeze effect as being the saving of life as an eternal presence, which is not natural but a cause in science, then it would have been taught to be exact as a cause.
If humans believe that when we die we still own a spirit and live in an eternal spirit when the human life/body is deceased. And we state that our parents as humans came out as a pre owned spirit and changed, then if you wanted in science to give self back to an eternal form, you would say a cause and effect gave life a variation to being real eternal, which would be incorruptible.
The science teaching would therefore have reasoned what purpose and what motivation caused science to sacrifice and attack natural life in the sciences by the gases. And it would own a reasonable discussion in the bible about changing the ST saint Gases/spirits of the stone.
As I am not a scientist then I cannot quote scientific functions from biblical reading, but maybe a scientist could reason it as a true relative teaching purpose of the ancients, why they told you to never alter God again and mean it.
Acts 1:9
And after He had said these things, He was lifted up while they were looking on, and a cloud received Him out of their sight.
Matthew 17:5
While he was still speaking, a bright cloud overshadowed them, and behold, a voice out of the cloud said, “This is My beloved Son, with whom I am well-pleased; listen to Him!”
Source: 8 Bible verses about Clouds And Jesus Christ
jesus seen in clouds - Bing images
The story of life sacrificed historic is a story that details a life from a baby, who grew into an aware life attacked in the statements about changes to God.
ST ONE....our planet, its spirits stated to be HOLY by definition of the sciences.
It is a known stigmata human condition for the cell body and the blood to alter its natural holy supported living conditions. Ebola in modern day review is very much a reminder of life in sacrifice and attack.
And humans world wide continue to see SIGNS in the clouds and take photos.
Hence the New Testament details are realised, and it involves changed to ST ONE, by science.
The New Testaments said never give G O D....one a name ever again. Science proves that it had given names to the spirits of God. And it was detailed as a lawful agreement in a Holy life want/ownership to not change God ever again.
So it was a less son. What we mean when we use words and infer word usage to explain rational details of a study and also involving DATA relative to Genetics, to evolution and return of the life/body in reincarnation themes.
Being atmospheric, spirits of the atmosphere, gases and its mass. The theme ICE end of year return/newly formed and newly born, supported an animal and human baby stable life regain/returned healed holiness.
Taken from us by the males who continued to give names to the spirits of the Earth/heavens and changing them. If you quote that a spirit is NOBLE and then alter its NOBLE state in a reaction, then obviously it is no longer NOBLE.
Science however states that it does not own change for it uses the gas spirits by MASS presence. Why they claim they do no change as the NOBLE gas/spirit still remains present.
10 Quick Facts About Helium
Methane is a current atmospheric problem.
Incorruptible would mean a huge release of the gas used for today for cryogenics given to the human belief of a SAINT an incorruptible cellular body, as a causation.
If science promised that it would give your life a deep freeze effect as being the saving of life as an eternal presence, which is not natural but a cause in science, then it would have been taught to be exact as a cause.
If humans believe that when we die we still own a spirit and live in an eternal spirit when the human life/body is deceased. And we state that our parents as humans came out as a pre owned spirit and changed, then if you wanted in science to give self back to an eternal form, you would say a cause and effect gave life a variation to being real eternal, which would be incorruptible.
The science teaching would therefore have reasoned what purpose and what motivation caused science to sacrifice and attack natural life in the sciences by the gases. And it would own a reasonable discussion in the bible about changing the ST saint Gases/spirits of the stone.
As I am not a scientist then I cannot quote scientific functions from biblical reading, but maybe a scientist could reason it as a true relative teaching purpose of the ancients, why they told you to never alter God again and mean it.
Ehav4Ever
Well-Known Member
Actually, that is not at all a common ground. What Christians mean by the statement Hebrew "scriptures" is not relatable to what we mean by the Tanakh. Also, the term "Hebrew Scriptures" is really not our term.
THE common ground we have with Christians is the same one we have with Muslims. All off of us hold to some of the concepts about the Source of creation and we also agree on who received the Torah at Mount Sinai - i.e. Israel/Jews.
The differences are a lot more than how Jesus is viewed. Jesus is not even a part of our equation. The differences are the following.
- As stated earlier, Israel/Jews was at Mount Sinai to receive the Torah from Hashem, including how the actual text (which was in Hebrew) is correctly to be understood and performed. (not a question but a statement)
- Since that time until now there has always been some Jewish communities in various parts of the world that have constantly and consitantly been keeping the Torah given at Mount Sinai.
- The Hebrew text that Hashem transmitted to Moses was given to him and all of Israel with an oral component. (This includes meanings of the words, acceptable methods of performing mitzvoth, how to decide issues based on future developments, etc.)
- Since Israel/Jews were the ones who received the Torah and since all ancient, authentic, and authorative sources and concepts are accepted by all ancient Jewish communities there is no bias from us on this issue.
- If someone presents a ancient, authentic, and authorative Torah based position for something we must know, beleive, or do then we Jews are "required" to accept it. Yet, it has to be proven using the methods dictated in the Torah.
- Further, the Torah does not require a Jew to beleive in anything but instead to know what is true and to prove it out. If something is proven to be unreliable we Jews have a mitzvah from the Torah to reject it.
- Lastly, the Torah gives us a method for a Jew to determine if we are being blinded by our own personal bias. It tells us to go back through our ancestors and see if the concept is something they knew about, held by, did, or beleived.
- If the answer is no we are required to determine where we are getting our concepts from and prove them out.
The problem in history has been that there have been "some" Christians who were't/aren't happy with us ignoring it for some reason. We have often had to respond to those who aren't happy in order to help Jews they want to influence, by force or coercion.
The Christians who have not cared what we Jews ignore, we have had the best relationships with them.
I think the further re-enactment of a debate that was forced upon Rabbi Mosheh ben Nachman may show what I mean above.
Last edited:
CG Didymus
Veteran Member
And, for me, it all comes back to the Jews. Do people really understand why the Jews don't accept Jesus as their Messiah? From there it ties in Islam and the Baha'is. Both build off of Judaism and Christianity to create and justify their religions. So they need Christianity and Jesus to be true, yet not completely true. It's like Jesus is automatically accepted as being the Jewish Messiah, no matter what Jews might think. But the Christians made him more than he was by making him God. So Islam was needed to correct that misinterpretation. And then the Baha'is come along and "fix" other things that all the other religions got wrong.
Now we got something. Let's start over. What do Jews have to say about all of this? Thanks for the videos.
Yes, because everyone thinks their interpretations of the Bible are correct. I don't know the language, so if I only listen to a Christian or a Baha'i or whoever, they can make the English translations say pretty much anything... and they do. Like the King and Prince of Tyre is Lucifer. Or a young maiden is a virgin and got pregnant without having sex with a man.
Sometimes I think they really don't. Despite constant explanations...
Ehav4Ever
Well-Known Member
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
I have known Brian2 for almost 5 years now, we met on another forum..Hasn't it? I watched Christians and Jews going in circles and Christians and Baha'is going in circles, and even an 'undecided' going in circles with Christians and Bahai's.
Don't feel bad, we have been going in circles for 5 years.
I don't feel bad. I was merely pointing out the fact.I have known Brian2 for almost 5 years now, we met on another forum..
Don't feel bad, we have been going in circles for 5 years.
Riders
Well-Known Member
I listened to the first o it is interesting. I forgot Paul never really met Jesus. He was walking down the road and God struck him down by a vision of Jesus talking to him right? But all we know is he claimed to have this vision and God told him he was an Apostle. It is interesting.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
It's not really THAT difficult.... Obviously Jesus has not fulfilled the messianic prophecies, so He cannot be the messiah the Jews are waiting for, and it does not work to say Jesus will fulfill the remainder of those prophecies when He returns, because Jesus has not returned and there is no reason to believe that Jesus will return, since He never said He would return. Rather, Jesus said that His work was finished here and He was no more in the world (John 17:4, John 17:11).Sometimes I think they really don't. Despite constant explanations...
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
No, I did not think you felt bad... I said that in jest.
Some of us just like posting to him, even though we go in circles, because he is a nice guy.
Now insert Muhammad for Islam and the Bab or Baha'ullah for Baha'i. It's the same.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
I know full well what Jews believe as I have gone around those circles with them for many years on other forums.