History Repeats Itself

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ben_Masada
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Sorry but you are evading the issue. The point is that Jesus took the cross against his will. “Let thy will be done, and NOT MINE.” He couldn’t be more clear that it was not his will to die for the sins of anyone. Why do you folks insist on this romantic approach, even against Logic?

Nobody enjoys being crucified. His human nature recoils against what He is facing. But His Will is completely at One with His Father’s will to redeem humanity. His will is to see it through to completion and to be our sin-bearer . Since Jesus is the teacher par excellence everything He says and does is a object lesson for us . In this case the human temptation to avoid suffering and take the easy way out. But He does not yield to that temptation.🙂
 

Nobody enjoys being crucified. His human nature recoils against what He is facing. But His Will is completely at One with His Father’s will to redeem humanity. His will is to see it through to completion and to be our sin-bearer . Since Jesus is the teacher par excellence everything He says and does is a object lesson for us . In this case the human temptation to avoid suffering and take the easy way out. But He does not yield to that temptation.🙂
Oi vey! If I had not written in English, I could understand why
you insist on the same point, as if you have a ploblem with the language. To “Let thy will be done and NOT MINE,” you translage as being his will completely at one with God’s will. I am sorry, but I think you ought to go back to Elementary School for language basics.
 
**And what is this supposed to mean? I am not trying to accuse Jesus whom I believe was a religious Jew. I am trying to defend him of Hellenistic claims. **
Matthew makes more parallels so we realize that Jesus is the long-awaited Son of David.
 
Oi vey! If I had not written in English, I could understand why
you insist on the same point, as if you have a ploblem with the language. To “Let thy will be done and NOT MINE,” you translage as being his will completely at one with God’s will. I am sorry, but I think you ought to go back to Elementary School for language basics.
Was it the will of the suffering servant, in Isaiah 53 to have the LORD crush him in infirmity? Surrendering himself to death is entrusting himself to the Father, despite his fear of death. We are all called to sumbit to the divine will.

In the days when he was in the flesh, he offered prayers and supplications with loud cries and tears to the one who was able to save him from death, and he was heard because of his reverence. Son though he was, he learned obedience from what he suffered; and when he was made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him, declared by God high priest according to the order of Melchizedek. (Heb 5:7-10)
 
Ben Masada:
First, the Messiah that Israel is, according to Isaiah. You know that Isaiah 53 describes the predicaments of the Suffering Servant. Now, if you read Isaiah 41:8,9; 44:1,2,21; 45:4, you will see that Isaiah identifies that Servant with Israel by name, so that no one needs to assume that he was Jesus.
These verse refer to Israel (Jacob) as His servant, not His Anointed. Isaiah 53:5 says, “But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement of our peace was upon him; and with his stripes we are healed.” (ASV) How does this apply to Israel? Verse 6 reads, “All we like sheep have gone astray; we have turned every one to his own way; and Jehovah hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.” How will the Lord lay the “iniquity of us all” upon Israel? I know Israel has had a rough history (brought about, in large part, by their own turning away from the Law). How is Israel the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53? You have not proven your claim.
Ben Masada:
Now, for the commandment that forbids one to die for another. For starters, bear in mind the expression “thou shall not.” Thou shall not, introduces mosts of the negative commandments of the Decalogue. The same language is applied here. Thou shall not be put to death for the sins of another. Everyone shall die for his or her own sins. That’s a commandment of the Law in Judaism. Jesus was Jewish. He would never go against his own declaration in Matthew 5:17-19 that he came to fulfill the Law and the Prophets down to the letter. We can see clearly that this is an item in the Christology of Paul, who was the one who fabicrated the unJewish idea that an individual can die for the sins of another.
It is against the law to execute a father for the sins of a son (and vice verse). Is it against the law for a soldier to jump on a hand grenade in order to save his fellow soldiers? Is it against the law to push someone out of the path of a speeding bus and take the hit yourself? These may not be the best examples of what Jesus did for us by His death on the cross, but I think it shows that it IS OK to give your life for others (and I don’t believe it’s an "unJewish " idea to give one’s life in order to save others).
 
Matthew makes more parallels so we realize that Jesus is the long-awaited Son of David.
Jesus could not be son of David, thanks to you guys, who have denied that he was a biological son of Joseph’s, who was the one from the lineage of David. So, there is no use for this “long-awaited son of David,” or whatever you mean by.
 
Was it the will of the suffering servant, in Isaiah 53 to have the LORD crush him in infirmity? Surrendering himself to death is entrusting himself to the Father, despite his fear of death. We are all called to sumbit to the divine will.

QUOTE]

**The Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53 did not know why he had to die for. He surrendered himself to death because he thought it was the natural course of war. The Assyrians were overwhelmingly stronger than Israel, the Kingdom of the North.

I know we are not talking about the same Suffering Servant. You are talking about Jesus and I am talking about Israel or Messiah ben Joseph according to Isaiah.**
 
Jesus could not be son of David, thanks to you guys, who have denied that he was a biological son of Joseph’s, who was the one from the lineage of David. So, there is no use for this “long-awaited son of David,” or whatever you mean by.
Joseph was the legal adoptive foster father of Jesus, who was specially chosen by God himself.

Such was his intention when, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, "Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary your wife into your home. For it is through the holy Spirit that this child has been conceived in her. (Mt 1:20)

Where in Jewish thought is legal fatherhood not as real as biological paternity? Where in Jewish custom are adopted sons not able to recieve full hereditary rights?
 
The Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53 did not know why he had to die for. He surrendered himself to death because he thought it was the natural course of war. The Assyrians were overwhelmingly stronger than Israel, the Kingdom of the North.
In other words, he accepted it was the will of God.
**I know we are not talking about the same Suffering Servant. You are talking about Jesus and I am talking about Israel or Messiah ben Joseph according to Isaiah. **
I know. Why is Messiah ben Joseph will completely at one with God’s will, and Jesus’ is not?
 
Joseph was the legal adoptive foster father of Jesus, who was specially chosen by God himself.

Such was his intention when, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, "Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary your wife into your home. For it is through the holy Spirit that this child has been conceived in her. (Mt 1:20)

Where in Jewish thought is legal fatherhood not as real as biological paternity? Where in Jewish custom are adopted sons not able to recieve full hereditary rights?
Ryanoneil, Jesus was a religious Jewish man. Therefore, he had to go according to Judaism, whose culture is that Tribal lineage is transmitted only and exclusively through the father. Excluding mother and adoption. Mother difines only the Jewishness of the Jew; not the Tribe he is supposed to belong to. How can you come from another religion to tell how Judaism is supposed to run? Why don’t you ask any Rabbi? You can go into a Synagogue and ask who is the Rabbi and ask about this. Just to hear a second opinion, if my credibility does not enjoy your appreciation.
 
In other words, he accepted it was the will of God.

I know. Why is Messiah ben Joseph will completely at one with God’s will, and Jesus’ is not?
**Yes, Israel or MBJ did accept its destiny as the will of God.
Regarding Jesus, it’s written that it was not his will to die on the cross. That’s the whole issue. He did God’s will; not his. For his will to be completely at one with God’s will, he would not have to express that remark, which in other words could be understood as: “Okay, let it be as you want! But be aware that I am being forced into this!” If you are a father or mother, you understand what I mean, when children speak to us like that. **
 
**Yes, Israel or MBJ did accept its destiny as the will of God.
Regarding Jesus, it’s written that it was not his will to die on the cross. That’s the whole issue. He did God’s will; not his. For his will to be completely at one with God’s will, he would not have to express that remark, which in other words could be understood as: “Okay, let it be as you want! But be aware that I am being forced into this!” If you are a father or mother, you understand what I mean, when children speak to us like that. **

The are several passages in the Gospels where Jesus tries to prepare his disciples for his inevitable death. They couldn’t quite grasp that He had to die . In Matt. 16:21 " Jesus began to show his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things from the elders and scribes and chief priests , and be put to death and on the third day rise again.And Peter taking him aside began to chide him, saying " Far be it from thee, O Lord; this will never happen to thee “He turned and said to Peter, " Get behind me,satan; for thou dost not mind the things of God, but those of men”

The Bible needs to be read "in context " instead of trying to bend a certain passage to make it mean what you want it to mean.👍
 
Ryanoneil, Jesus was a religious Jewish man. Therefore, he had to go according to Judaism, whose culture is that Tribal lineage is transmitted only and exclusively through the father. Excluding mother and adoption. Mother difines only the Jewishness of the Jew; not the Tribe he is supposed to belong to. How can you come from another religion to tell how Judaism is supposed to run? Why don’t you ask any Rabbi? You can go into a Synagogue and ask who is the Rabbi and ask about this. Just to hear a second opinion, if my credibility does not enjoy your appreciation.
I didn’t say how Judaism is supposed to run. I quoted the NT and asked two questions. I don’t know any Rabbi.
 
**Yes, Israel or MBJ did accept its destiny as the will of God.

Regarding Jesus, it’s written that it was not his will to die on the cross. That’s the whole issue. He did God’s will; not his. For his will to be completely at one with God’s will, he would not have to express that remark, which in other words could be understood as: “Okay, let it be as you want! But be aware that I am being forced into this!” If you are a father or mother, you understand what I mean, when children speak to us like that. **
Israel or MBJ didn’t want to suffer and die either, so what are you really trying to say? There is no issue because a sane person has a natural aversion to suffering. But Jesus chose to embrace the Father’s will even though he was in agony about it.

This is why the Father loves me, because I lay down my life in order to take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down on my own. I have power to lay it down, and power to take it up again. This command I have received from my Father." (Jn 10:17-18)

I understand all to well about beligerent children, but your example doesn’t apply here.
 

The are several passages in the Gospels where Jesus tries to prepare his disciples for his inevitable death. They couldn’t quite grasp that He had to die . In Matt. 16:21 " Jesus began to show his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things from the elders and scribes and chief priests , and be put to death and on the third day rise again.And Peter taking him aside began to chide him, saying " Far be it from thee, O Lord; this will never happen to thee “He turned and said to Peter, " Get behind me,satan; for thou dost not mind the things of God, but those of men”

The Bible needs to be read "in context " instead of trying to bend a certain passage to make it mean what you want it to mean.👍
**Let’s leave Jesus’ willingness or lack of if alone for now, because I just can’t get through your hide with logic and commonsense.

Let’s bring up your illustration of Jesus referring to Peter as satan for not wanting him to die in Jerusalem. Next, you advise us to read the Bible “in context.” Very good! The text says that after the last supper satan got into Judas to go out and to deliver Jesus to be arrested.

Are there two different satans here or they were contradicting each other? In Peter, he didn’t want Jesus to die. In Judas, he was rushing the death of Jesus. How do you read this contradiction “in context?” **
 
I didn’t say how Judaism is supposed to run. I quoted the NT and asked two questions. I don’t know any Rabbi.
All right, but if I went back to count how many times I have explained this here in this forum, I would be sick of reading the same thing over and over again. Sorry, I didn’t mean to be belicose.
 
Israel or MBJ didn’t want to suffer and die either, so what are you really trying to say? There is no issue because a sane person has a natural aversion to suffering. But Jesus chose to embrace the Father’s will even though he was in agony about it.

This is why the Father loves me, because I lay down my life in order to take it up again. No one takes it from me, but I lay it down on my own. I have power to lay it down, and power to take it up again. This command I have received from my Father." (Jn 10:17-18)

I understand all to well about beligerent children, but your example doesn’t apply here.
**If Jesus chose, of his own freewill, to embrace God’s will, why would he give off the remark, “Be thy will done; not mine.?” Sorry, but this is not the same as you bring out in the next paragraph that he willingly laid his life down, because no one would take it from him. That’s a cliche that does not make any sense at all. The opposite is rather true that they were after his life and he fled to the Gethsemane. **
 
All right, but if I went back to count how many times I have explained this here in this forum, I would be sick of reading the same thing over and over again. Sorry, I didn’t mean to be belicose.
No problem! 🙂
 
**If Jesus chose, of his own freewill, to embrace God’s will, why would he give off the remark, “Be thy will done; not mine.?” Sorry, but this is not the same as you bring out in the next paragraph that he willingly laid his life down, because no one would take it from him. That’s a cliche that does not make any sense at all. The opposite is rather true that they were after his life and he fled to the Gethsemane. **
Jesus dodged capture plenty of other times because it was not the appointed time. Jesus told Judas “What you are going to do, do quickly” (Jn 13:27) because the appointed time had come. Jesus simply went to the garden to pray and prepair.

One of the keys to understanding Jesus’ words is the relationship between his divine and human nature. This scene shows the human nature of Jesus. Not that he divested himself of divinity but that he was united with humanity. He said it right after telling the disciples to **“Watch and pray that you may not undergo the test. The spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak.” (Mt 26:41) ** The garden ordeal is traditionally viewed as Satan’s most aggressive assult on Jesus. And there are parallels with the Garden of Eden.

Where Adam asserted himself to become like God, Jesus humbled himself to become man and undo the original sin of Adam. He is giving us an example of humility and obedience to imitate, and also a divine revelation. The life giving love that is between him and the Father is given to us also. God loves us so much he is willing to die for us (He also rose from the dead conquering death allowing for our resurrection on the last day).

"This is how you are to pray: Our Father in heaven, hallowed be your name, your kingdom come, your will be done, on earth as in heaven. Give us today our daily bread; and forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors; and do not subject us to the final test, but deliver us from the evil one. (Mt 6:9-13)
 
Jesus and his Apostles never had anything to do with Christianity. The religious sect they organized was called The Sect of the Nazarenes.
Matthew 16:15-17 – “And you, who do you say that I am?” “You are the Messiah”,
Simon Peter answered, “the Son of the Living God!” Jesus replied, “…no mere man
has revealed this to you, but my heavenly Father”.

Peter was an apostle. And why would you admire Jesus for telling such a lie?

It will be impossible to have a true discussion until I have a new bible, which contains
only the parts that you believe…

Blessings on you sir…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top