Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Convince Me!

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by chair
    Was Abrahams's sacrifice about sin? That is news to me.
    Abraham's sacrifice was a test to see if he would obey YHVH. Any time YHVH asks us to do anything it is a test. Such as keeping His commandments is a test.

    But this story about the offering of Isaac is also about sin. At this time in history YHVH had not as yet layed out the sacrificial system which He gave through Moses. So I am forced to make some assumptions here. I assumed that since Abraham and YHVH were on speaking terms that YHVH would have spoken His Torah to Abraham and others like Job. Job being a contemporary of Abraham offered burnt offerings to YHVH as a sin offering. Abraham evidently made sacrifices of lambs regular enough that Isaac knew they needed a lamb.

    Basically anytime we see disobediance of man to YHVH's commandments it will lead to death. But YHVH made it possible through the sacrificial system to make substitutions.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by chair
      Take the Chair challenge! Convince me that Christianity is true. Many of you have been trying to do this in various threads, so here is a chance to go at it in a straightforward way, instead of hijacking other threads.

      There are some rules:

      1. Please define, BRIEFLY, what you mean by Christianity before you start. There are differing views about this, so I would like to know what exactly you are trying to convince me of.
      That Jesus of Nazareth was the Messiah, the promised deliverer. and through Him we are reconciled to the Father and Creator...YHWH

      2. Give some evidence or reasoning for your statements.
      3. Avoid circular reasoning. If you want to prove something from the Bible, you will have to convince me that the Bible is true first.
      4. Please be brief. I get lost in long-winded lengthy posts.
      Jesus, in spite of a Roman execution by crucifixion, was raised to life again. He makes ordinary people Sons of God and therefore heirs.

      But there is more I want you to consider, chair.
      For if the casting away of them (the Jews) is the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead?

      And if the firstfruit is holy, so is the lump: and if the root is holy, so are the branches. But if some of the branches were broken off, and thou, being a wild olive, wast grafted in among them, and didst become partaker with them of the root of the fatness of the olive tree; glory not over the branches: but if thou gloriest, it is not thou that bearest the root, but the root thee.

      For if thou wast cut out of that which is by nature a wild olive tree, and wast grafted contrary to nature into a good olive tree; how much more shall these, which are the natural branches, be grafted into their own olive tree?

      For I would not, brethren, have you ignorant of this mystery, lest ye be wise in your own conceits, that a hardening in part hath befallen Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in; and so all Israel shall be saved: even as it is written, There shall come out of Zion the Deliverer; He shall turn away ungodliness from Jacob: And this is my covenant unto them, When I shall take away their sins.

      As touching the gospel, they are enemies for your sake: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers' sake. For the gifts and the calling of God are not repented of.

      For as ye in time past were disobedient to God, but now have obtained mercy by their disobedience, even so have these also now been disobedient, that by the mercy shown to you they also may now obtain mercy. For God hath shut up all unto disobedience, that he might have mercy upon all.

      O the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and the knowledge of God!

      how unsearchable are his judgments, and his ways past tracing out! For who hath known the mind of the Lord? or who hath been his counsellor? or who hath first given to him, and it shall be recompensed unto him again? For of him, and through him, and unto him, are all things. To him be the glory for ever. Amen.
      (The Apostle Paul, a Pharisee that came to know Christ, Romans 11:15-18; 24-36 ASV)
      And it shall come to pass in the latter days, that the mountain of Jehovah's house shall be established on the top of the mountains, and shall be exalted above the hills; and all nations shall flow unto it. And many peoples shall go and say, Come ye, and let us go up to the mountain of Jehovah, to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the word of Jehovah from Jerusalem. And he will judge between the nations, and will decide concerning many peoples; and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruning-hooks; nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.
      (Isaiah 2:2-4 ASV)

      There is still a lot of trouble ahead...but that will not always be so.

      I understand you'll be leaving TOL at the end of October. I appreciate what you have had to say.

      The Lord bless you and keep you.
      The Lord make his face to shine upon you.
      The Lord lift his countenance upon you
      And be gracious unto you
      And give you peace. Amen.

      So they will put my name on the Israelites, and I will bless them.'" (Numbers 6:22-27)

      "In this manner therefore pray: 'Our Father who art in Heaven, may Thy name be kept holy; let Thy kingdom come; let Thy will be done, as in Heaven so on earth; give us to-day our bread for the day; and forgive us our shortcomings, as we also have forgiven those who have failed in their duty towards us; and bring us not into temptation, but rescue us from the Evil one.'
      (Jesus, Matthew 6:9-13)

      God bless you,
      Stephen.

      Comment


      • Hello chair,

        1) I know you deny inherited sin, but you never explained to me why no one has to be
        taught to sin. Why do very young children instinctivly know how to lie and steal? If sin
        were not part of their nature from their birth, they would need to be taught to do these
        things. If you want to deny inherited sin that's ok, but you still need to answer this
        question to yourself "Why do very young children lie and steal without being taught how or
        why.

        2) Bathsheba was not a prophet speaking for God, Isaiah was.

        3) In the Talmud, we read that Rabbi Johanan said, "The world was created for the sake
        of the Messiah, what is this Messiah's name? The school of Rabbi Shila said 'his name is
        Shiloh, for it is written; until Shiloh come". We also read in the Targum Onkelos "The
        transmission of domain shall not cease from the house of Judah, nor the scribe from his children's children, forever, until Messiah comes". In another, Targum Pseudo-Jonathan,
        we read "King and rulers shall not cease from the house of Judah...until King Messiah
        comes". Still another, Targum Yerushalmi, "Kings shall not cease from the house of Judah...until the time of the coming of the King Messiah...to whom all the dominions of the earth shall become subservient". These are the rabbinical writings of old and they
        were convinced that Shiloh meant Messiah.
        Who say the sceptor represents the authority to administer capitol punishment? Rabbi
        Rachmon. We find his comments in the Babylonian Talmud, Chapter 4. "When the
        members of the Sanhedrin found themselves deprived of their right over life and death, a
        general consternation took possession of them: they covered their heads with ashes, and
        their bodies with sackcloth, exclaiming: 'Woe unto us for the scepter has departed from
        Judah and the Messiah has not come.'"
        You are right. I did not get my assumptions from the text. I got my assumptions from
        the Babylonian Talmud, the rabbinical writings.
        As to Jesus not having the "ability to enforce capitol punishment", I have to disagree. In
        John 8:1-11, looking at this as an historical account NOT saying Jesus is Messiah, we find
        Jesus teaching in the temple when the scribes and Pharisees brought in a woman that
        they had caught in the act of adultery. The quoted Moses concerning what to do with
        someone caught in adultery (that they must be stoned) and then put the ball in Jesus's
        court. They asked Him what He said about it. They were trying to trap Him. If He said
        "yes, she deserves to die", then they could say that He spoke against Roman law, but, if
        He said "no, she doesn't deserve to die", then they could say that He spoke against the
        Law. Jesus had every right to say "yes", after all the law was the law. Instead, Jesus
        stooped down and started writing on the ground. We don't know what He wrote, maybe
        He wrote "liar",or "coveter", or "idolater", but either way He ignored them and wrote. As
        they pressed Him for an answer, He stood and told them that those without sin should
        cast the first stone, and then went back to writing. They all left. The scribes and Pharisees gave Jesus the right to enforce capitol punishment that day and He chose to
        enforce mercy and forgiveness instead.

        I would like to point you back to Isaiah 52 for a minuet and see what the Talmud says
        about a particular Scripture. Isaiah 52:14: "His – the Messiah's – appearance was marred
        more than that of any man, and His form more than the sons of men" Sanhedrin 97b,
        Yalkut volume II p. 53c and also Shemoth R, 15-19. Zechariah 12:10-12, which I'm sure
        you will say is not Messianic in nature, the Sukkah 52a says "They will look upon Me –
        the Messiah – whom they have pierced". It's late and I must get to bed. I look forward to
        your response.

        God Bless you.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by daddyugi
          Hello chair,

          1) I know you deny inherited sin, but you never explained to me why no one has to be
          taught to sin. Why do very young children instinctivly know how to lie and steal? If sin
          were not part of their nature from their birth, they would need to be taught to do these
          things. If you want to deny inherited sin that's ok, but you still need to answer this
          question to yourself "Why do very young children lie and steal without being taught how or
          why.

          2) Bathsheba was not a prophet speaking for God, Isaiah was.

          3) In the Talmud, we read that Rabbi Johanan said, "The world was created for the sake
          of the Messiah, what is this Messiah's name? The school of Rabbi Shila said 'his name is
          Shiloh, for it is written; until Shiloh come". We also read in the Targum Onkelos "The
          transmission of domain shall not cease from the house of Judah, nor the scribe from his children's children, forever, until Messiah comes". In another, Targum Pseudo-Jonathan,
          we read "King and rulers shall not cease from the house of Judah...until King Messiah
          comes". Still another, Targum Yerushalmi, "Kings shall not cease from the house of Judah...until the time of the coming of the King Messiah...to whom all the dominions of the earth shall become subservient". These are the rabbinical writings of old and they
          were convinced that Shiloh meant Messiah.
          Who say the sceptor represents the authority to administer capitol punishment? Rabbi
          Rachmon. We find his comments in the Babylonian Talmud, Chapter 4. "When the
          members of the Sanhedrin found themselves deprived of their right over life and death, a
          general consternation took possession of them: they covered their heads with ashes, and
          their bodies with sackcloth, exclaiming: 'Woe unto us for the scepter has departed from
          Judah and the Messiah has not come.'"
          You are right. I did not get my assumptions from the text. I got my assumptions from
          the Babylonian Talmud, the rabbinical writings.
          As to Jesus not having the "ability to enforce capitol punishment", I have to disagree. In
          John 8:1-11, looking at this as an historical account NOT saying Jesus is Messiah, we find
          Jesus teaching in the temple when the scribes and Pharisees brought in a woman that
          they had caught in the act of adultery. The quoted Moses concerning what to do with
          someone caught in adultery (that they must be stoned) and then put the ball in Jesus's
          court. They asked Him what He said about it. They were trying to trap Him. If He said
          "yes, she deserves to die", then they could say that He spoke against Roman law, but, if
          He said "no, she doesn't deserve to die", then they could say that He spoke against the
          Law. Jesus had every right to say "yes", after all the law was the law. Instead, Jesus
          stooped down and started writing on the ground. We don't know what He wrote, maybe
          He wrote "liar",or "coveter", or "idolater", but either way He ignored them and wrote. As
          they pressed Him for an answer, He stood and told them that those without sin should
          cast the first stone, and then went back to writing. They all left. The scribes and Pharisees gave Jesus the right to enforce capitol punishment that day and He chose to
          enforce mercy and forgiveness instead.

          I would like to point you back to Isaiah 52 for a minuet and see what the Talmud says
          about a particular Scripture. Isaiah 52:14: "His – the Messiah's – appearance was marred
          more than that of any man, and His form more than the sons of men" Sanhedrin 97b,
          Yalkut volume II p. 53c and also Shemoth R, 15-19. Zechariah 12:10-12, which I'm sure
          you will say is not Messianic in nature, the Sukkah 52a says "They will look upon Me –
          the Messiah – whom they have pierced". It's late and I must get to bed. I look forward to
          your response.

          God Bless you.
          Well, It is early in the morning here, and I have to get to work, so I have no time ot check out these sources..

          But don't you think it odd to prove that Jesus was the Messiah by quoting Rabbis who completely rejected him?

          Comment


          • Originally posted by daddyugi
            Hello chair,

            1) I know you deny inherited sin, but you never explained to me why no one has to be
            taught to sin. Why do very young children instinctivly know how to lie and steal? If sin
            were not part of their nature from their birth, they would need to be taught to do these
            things. If you want to deny inherited sin that's ok, but you still need to answer this
            question to yourself "Why do very young children lie and steal without being taught how or
            why.

            2) Bathsheba was not a prophet speaking for God, Isaiah was.

            3) In the Talmud, we read that Rabbi Johanan said, "The world was created for the sake
            of the Messiah, what is this Messiah's name? The school of Rabbi Shila said 'his name is
            Shiloh, for it is written; until Shiloh come". We also read in the Targum Onkelos "The
            transmission of domain shall not cease from the house of Judah, nor the scribe from his children's children, forever, until Messiah comes". In another, Targum Pseudo-Jonathan,
            we read "King and rulers shall not cease from the house of Judah...until King Messiah
            comes". Still another, Targum Yerushalmi, "Kings shall not cease from the house of Judah...until the time of the coming of the King Messiah...to whom all the dominions of the earth shall become subservient". These are the rabbinical writings of old and they
            were convinced that Shiloh meant Messiah.
            Who say the sceptor represents the authority to administer capitol punishment? Rabbi
            Rachmon. We find his comments in the Babylonian Talmud, Chapter 4. "When the
            members of the Sanhedrin found themselves deprived of their right over life and death, a
            general consternation took possession of them: they covered their heads with ashes, and
            their bodies with sackcloth, exclaiming: 'Woe unto us for the scepter has departed from
            Judah and the Messiah has not come.'"
            You are right. I did not get my assumptions from the text. I got my assumptions from
            the Babylonian Talmud, the rabbinical writings.
            As to Jesus not having the "ability to enforce capitol punishment", I have to disagree. In
            John 8:1-11, looking at this as an historical account NOT saying Jesus is Messiah, we find
            Jesus teaching in the temple when the scribes and Pharisees brought in a woman that
            they had caught in the act of adultery. The quoted Moses concerning what to do with
            someone caught in adultery (that they must be stoned) and then put the ball in Jesus's
            court. They asked Him what He said about it. They were trying to trap Him. If He said
            "yes, she deserves to die", then they could say that He spoke against Roman law, but, if
            He said "no, she doesn't deserve to die", then they could say that He spoke against the
            Law. Jesus had every right to say "yes", after all the law was the law. Instead, Jesus
            stooped down and started writing on the ground. We don't know what He wrote, maybe
            He wrote "liar",or "coveter", or "idolater", but either way He ignored them and wrote. As
            they pressed Him for an answer, He stood and told them that those without sin should
            cast the first stone, and then went back to writing. They all left. The scribes and Pharisees gave Jesus the right to enforce capitol punishment that day and He chose to
            enforce mercy and forgiveness instead.

            I would like to point you back to Isaiah 52 for a minuet and see what the Talmud says
            about a particular Scripture. Isaiah 52:14: "His – the Messiah's – appearance was marred
            more than that of any man, and His form more than the sons of men" Sanhedrin 97b,
            Yalkut volume II p. 53c and also Shemoth R, 15-19. Zechariah 12:10-12, which I'm sure
            you will say is not Messianic in nature, the Sukkah 52a says "They will look upon Me –
            the Messiah – whom they have pierced". It's late and I must get to bed. I look forward to
            your response.

            God Bless you.
            Before I respomd to your points, a few comments and questions of my own:

            A. First of all, I would like to tell you that you are doing better than I expected. What or who do you use as a source on Jewish texts,like the ones yoiu mentioned in this post?

            B. Secondly, our conversation has gotten to a point where we are going over the interpretation of some unclear Biblical texts. That is OK, but I think that we are missing the basic questions:

            i. What is the Messiah? What is he expected to do?
            ii. Is the Messiah also God?
            iii. Is the Law no longer applicable?
            iv. Is the New Testament report of what Jesus did and said accurate?

            These are the major differences in our viewpoints, and I think we are not really dealing with them.

            Now, on to your points.

            I will agree that children need to be taught how to behave. But to behave really badly, they need to taught as well. Think of the kids who get drawn into street gangs. If anything this raises the question of free will, which is not our topic here. In any case it is one thing to say that men are capable of sin, and another alotogether to say that they are automatically sinners, guilty as if they had personally sinned.

            Think about Cain, compared to Adam. Adam had to be taught that he shouldn't eat from a particular tree. Cain, on teh other hand, should have known on his own not to murder. He was never specifically told that it was wrong. The Bible views murder as something that humans inately know is immoral.

            Regarding the Rabbis who identify "Shiloh" as being the Messiah. Yes, that is a Rabbinical explanation of the text. It is one of many. Some others are that it is David himself, or the location called Shiloh. There are many viewpoints that are expressed in the Talmud and other sources.

            By the way, I would like to know where that quote about the members of the Sanhedrin comes from. "Chapter 4" is not enough of an identifier for the Talmud- you need to know what Tractate you are talking about. I tried googling part of the text, and only got a few Christian sites that did not really specify where the quote was from. Thanks.

            I find myself in a situation similar to that of Nachmanides in the 13th century, who in a famous disputation with a Christian (a former Jew), had to deal with a Midrash that said that the Messiah was born immediately after the destruction of teh Temple. He had two responses:
            1. That he didn't believe that the Midrash was literally true.
            2. EVen if the Midrash was true, it didn't serve the Christian viewpoint, since Jesus died before the Temple was destroyed.

            So, I don't necessarily accept that interpretaion of "Shiloh". Nor do I think that the Rabbis who liked that interpretation thought that Jesus was the Messiah.

            But beyond that, as I have pointed out, Jesus didn't have the power of capital punishment. He could, and supposedly did, point out moral problems with it, but that is a far cry from a "scepter", as his own arrest and death show quite clearly. Not only that, but even your optimistic chronology doesn't make too much sense. Why should this happen when Jesus is nine or ten, and not when he was born, or when he entered Jerusalem, or was crucified?

            Comment


            • Hello chair,

              No, I don't think it odd to show that Jesus is Messiah by quoting Rabbis, after all, men of
              God are men of God, and not all Rabbis completely rejected Him. I'll discuss that
              tomorrow when I have more time.

              Thank you for the compliment about doing better than you expected.
              I have been through hundreds and hundreds of websites. Some are so anti-Jesus that
              they twist Scripture and I have to discard them, others are so pro-Jesus that they apply
              Scripture to Him that are obviously not talking about Messiah and I have to discard them
              also. Finding websites with little bias is difficult but not impossible. I've found one website
              that has the Babylonian Talmud translated into English (sacred-texts.com) and I spent
              several hours searching and will continue to spend searching. I am obsessive-compulsive
              in nature which is bad as far as sleep goes but good as far as learning goes. Once I start
              on something, I have a hard time stopping, which is why I don't get to bed until 1:00 a.m.
              or after some nights ( I get up at about 5:45 a.m.). In fact, it's after 11:30 p.m. now and I
              need to get to bed shortly. I'll post more tomorrow night, when I'll have a little more time.

              God bless you.

              Comment


              • I spend far too much time on this forum myself. That's why I have decided to leave at the end of the month.

                Comment


                • Originally posted by chair
                  I spend far too much time on this forum myself. That's why I have decided to leave at the end of the month.
                  I would have liked to have dialoged more.
                  Good things come to those who shoot straight.

                  Did you only want evidence you are not going to call "wrong"? -Stripe

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by daddyugi
                    Hello chair,

                    No, I don't think it odd to show that Jesus is Messiah by quoting Rabbis, after all, men of
                    God are men of God, and not all Rabbis completely rejected Him. I'll discuss that
                    tomorrow when I have more time.

                    Thank you for the compliment about doing better than you expected.
                    I have been through hundreds and hundreds of websites. Some are so anti-Jesus that
                    they twist Scripture and I have to discard them, others are so pro-Jesus that they apply
                    Scripture to Him that are obviously not talking about Messiah and I have to discard them
                    also. Finding websites with little bias is difficult but not impossible. I've found one website
                    that has the Babylonian Talmud translated into English (sacred-texts.com) and I spent
                    several hours searching and will continue to spend searching. I am obsessive-compulsive
                    in nature which is bad as far as sleep goes but good as far as learning goes. Once I start
                    on something, I have a hard time stopping, which is why I don't get to bed until 1:00 a.m.
                    or after some nights ( I get up at about 5:45 a.m.). In fact, it's after 11:30 p.m. now and I
                    need to get to bed shortly. I'll post more tomorrow night, when I'll have a little more time.

                    God bless you.
                    Don't overdo yourself brother!

                    PK


                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by chair
                      I spend far too much time on this forum myself. That's why I have decided to leave at the end of the month.
                      Did you read post #121? I was wondering what you might say.

                      Comment


                      • Hello chair,

                        Sorry about not having all of what was supposed to follow chapter 4, I should have had
                        folio 37. Sorry. That particular quote I found in "Jesus before the Sanhedrin" by Augustin
                        Lemann.

                        I'm only going to answer one or two of the points that you want to discuss tonight and not
                        in the detail I want to. We had a parent/teacher conference tonight and got my son's
                        grades. He made one B+ and the rest A-, A's, and A+'s. We're very proud of him.
                        He's in the Excel program, a gifted program here in Indy, and his homeroom teacher (and
                        the rest of his teachers as well) said he was a pleasure to have in class and was always
                        well behaved. After that we had to go spend money to buy a new printer. He
                        needed to print off a report and our original printer decided to quit, so I wound up spending
                        most of the night shopping and setting up the new printer. Bummer.

                        i) "What is Messiah?" is more who is Messiah. According to Micah 5:2, He will be ruler
                        of Israel. Isaiah 11:4 tells us that He shall be a righteous Judge. He shall bring an
                        everlasting peace, Isaiah 9:7. He shall cause all the remnant of Israel scattered across
                        the globe to return to Israel, Isaiah 11:11-12. Again it's late and I apologize for having to
                        leave our discussion so soon, but I'll pick it up as soon as I can.

                        God bless you, Joel.

                        Comment


                        • Hello chair,

                          In my last post I very briefly gave what Messiah was going to do. There are a lot more
                          things that he will do, destroy Israel's ememies, cause all people to worship and serve
                          God, rebuild the temple, and rule during the time that all Jewish people follow God's
                          commandments.

                          ii) "Is Messiah also God?" People have been asking that question for mellinia. The only
                          way to answer this question is to go back to Scripture. Does Scripture say if Messiah is
                          God is the better question. Jeremiah 23:1-8, verse 3 God says "I myself will gather the
                          remnant of my flock out of all the countries where I have driven them and will bring them
                          back to their pasture, where they will be fruitful and increase in number." And in vs 6 we
                          read "In his days Judah will be saved and Israel will live in safety. This is the name by
                          which he will be called: The LORD Our Righteousness." I wanted to make sure of what
                          I was reading, so I looked up the word "LORD" in my Hebrew dictionary. The word that
                          was translated as LORD in english is the Jewish word "Yehovah" the Jewish national
                          name of God. Jeremiah was quoting God and throughout this chapter we read phrases
                          such as "declares the LORD", and "this is what the LORD Almighty says". God knows
                          what He's talking about and HE decided to calls Messiah (vs 5 calls him a "righteous
                          Branch") "Yehovah our Righteousness" or Jehovah-tsidkenu. Before you say that this
                          isn't a passage talking about Messiah (Moshiach), jewfaq.org lists the entire chapter of
                          Jeremiah 23 as Messianic. Is Moshiach also Yehovah? Yes, according to God and His
                          Word.

                          iii.) "Is the Law no longer applicable?" I want to make sure that I understand this
                          question properly. You are asking, if I understand, "Is the Law abolished". The answer is
                          no. The Law is God's Law and until He repeals it. Even Jesus said this in Matthew 5:18-
                          19 "For truly I say to you, until heaven and earth pass away, not the smallest letter or
                          stroke shall pass from the Law until all is accomplished. Whoever then annuls one of the
                          least of these commandments, and teaches others to do the same, shall be called the
                          least in the kingdom of heaven; but whoever keeps and teaches them, he shall be called
                          great in the kingdom of heaven."

                          I'll try to tackle the last point next time.

                          God bless you.

                          Comment


                          • I have a busy day ahead of me, so I won't be able to answer in detail.

                            1. I will point out, though, that Jesus did not fulfill many Messianic expectations, and the idea that he will someday is not very satisfying, to say the least, to a non-Christian. Can you see why?
                            2. Careful with how you read the Bible. God brings Israel's redemption. By means of the Messiah. It does not mean that messiah is god, any more than Moses was God.

                            Chair

                            Comment


                            • Hello chair,

                              I understand about being busy. I stay that way sometimes. At least it keeps me out of
                              trouble.

                              1) I understand that it's disappointing that the time of peace and worship of God is not
                              here. There are a lot of times that I wish the Messianic age would start yesterday. But,
                              we have to go back to what the Scripture say in order to see if our expectaions are in line
                              with God. There are other prophesies that we haven't discussed yet. I would like to point
                              your attention to Daniel 9:24-27. It's interesting that this is the only passage in Scripture
                              that actually says Messiah. Daniel is visited by Gabriel and was given an answer to his
                              prayer. In this answer we read in verse 26 we read "After the sixty-two 'sevens,' the
                              Anointed One will be cut off and will have nothing. The people of the ruler who will come
                              like a flood: War will continue until the end, and desolations have been decreed." I looked
                              up 'karath' and found that it meant "to cut (off, down or asunder); by implication to destroy
                              or consume; specifically to covenant (ie. make an alliance or bargain, originally by cutting
                              flesh and passing between the pieces); - chewed, be con-[feder-] ate, covenant, cut
                              (down, off), destroy, fall, feller, be freed, hew (down), make a league ([covenantly]), X lose,
                              perish, X utterly, X want." In reading the verse in context, we see that we can throw out
                              anything applying to a covenant since the verse say that He will have nothing. We also
                              have to strike the "con-[feder-] ate", "feller", "be freed" and "make a league" due to the
                              fact that He will have nothing. If you are "confederate" you are banded together with
                              something and therefore have something. Scripture tells us that He will have nothing, so
                              we have to throw "confederate" out as well as "make a league". If you are a "feller" then
                              you have what you fell or cut down. Again, He will have nothing, so we have to throw
                              "feller" out. That leaves "be freed". That doesn't match with verse 25 that calls the
                              Messiah "ruler". Why would a ruler need to be freed? Thus, we have to rule out "be
                              freed". What that leaves us with are definitions that deal with destruction. Not quite the
                              "expectation" of the Messiah, but this is something that we can't deny without denying
                              Scripture.

                              I want to direct your attention to Daniel chapter 7. We read about Daniels vision of the
                              four beast, "the Ancient of Days" (meaning God), and Messiah. We find Messiah in
                              verses 13 and 14. We see Messiah coming in clouds of heaven and God giving Him rule,
                              glory, and a kingdom. Now I want to direct your attention to Zechariah chapter 9 starting
                              with verse 1 and going through verse 10. In this portion of Scripture we see Messiah riding
                              on a donkey, on the foal of a donkey. Now, I am familiar with the Talmudist that claims
                              that "if" Jerusalem was worthy, Messiah would come in the clouds, and "if" Jerusalem
                              wasn't worthy, then Messiah would ride in on a donkey but not reveal Himself. The
                              problem with that theory is that there are no qualifiers on the two Scripture passages. You
                              don't find "if this then this" like you find in 2 Chronicles 7:14. "If my people which are
                              called by my name, shall humble themselves, and pray, and seek my face, and turn from
                              their wicked ways; then will I hear from heaven, and will forgive their sin, and will heal their
                              land." The "if/then" situation is conditional; if you do this, then I will do this. You don't find
                              this in any of the Scripture verses I directed you to. Now, either one of two things is true.
                              Either the Scriptures are false and you can't believe anything you read in it, Messiah
                              included, or Messiah must fulfill both prophesies. I am also familiar with the theory that
                              says that Messiah comes at two different times (which I whole-heartedly agree with) but as
                              two different people, Moshiach ben Yosef and Moshiach ben David. The problem with that
                              theory is that neither one fulfilled the prophies that their kingdom would last forever, peace
                              would be on the earth, only God worshipped, and Israel's enemies destroyed. Thus, we
                              have to disregard that theory. There are other prophesies to be discussed in another
                              post.

                              God bless you.

                              Comment


                              • Hello chair,

                                iv) "Is the New Testament report of what Jesus did and said accurate?" To answer that,
                                we must ask first is what we find in the New Testament historically accurate? Let's take
                                a look first at Luke, both the book and the author. Luke, a physician by trade, was also
                                a notable historian. Why would I confer on him the title of historian? Because Luke was
                                extremely careful to record people, places, positions, and events in detail. In both Luke
                                and Acts, Luke describes people, like Pilate. Most Roman Governors are virtually
                                unknown to modern historians. Pilate is a rare exception. We find the Inscription of
                                Pilate, a limestone tablet inscribed to Tiberius Ceasar from Pontius Pilate. Josephus
                                tells us a little bit about Pilate in Antiquities. Philo's Legatio ad Gaium describes Pilate
                                in less than favorable light, but yet it does describe him. In other archaeological studies
                                we find cities that Luke identified that for centuries had been lost. In fact, most people
                                rejected Luke and Acts. A renouned archaeologist, Sir William Ramsay, went to explore
                                Asia Minor to prove that Luke and Acts didn't belong in the New Testament. After
                                hundreds of hours of research, and a careful study of Acts 14:5-12, Sir Ramsay began to
                                believe that Luke was quite familiar with the people, places, and events that he wrote
                                about. Cities that were in question were found. All in all 32 countries, 54 cities, and 9
                                islands were named without error according to Norman Geisler in the Baker Encyclopedia
                                of Apologetics. In The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New
                                Testament, we read Sir Ramsay, the renouned archaeologics, write "The present writer
                                takes the view that Luke's history is unsurpassed in respect of its trustworthiness." I can
                                start giving examples if you'd like. I'll return later to give more examples of the historical
                                accuracy of the New Testament.

                                God bless you.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X