And true to life too!!
And I am to take the word of a man that inserts the name of a man into Isaiah 45:23… I don’t think so. The evidence (or lack of it) for his gospel speaks clearly that he was not aware of what the Tanakh says; else he manipulated it horribly for devious purposes… either way, this automatically draws up the question, “can he be trusted to actually be what he says he is?”
I did one better than the challenge you gave (highlighted in red)… I tried to force myself to see it as truth.
Hehe… And Jesus, a Jew, if he were here, would be agreeing with ME!!
The answer to all of this is in Jeremiah 33:25-26… the seed of David, the son of Jacob (that’d be passed down to Judah)… the Jewish People. And those who have the calling to join to them can do so via Isaiah 56.
We must be talking past one another. I absolutely believe Jeremiah 33:25-26 and Isaiah 56. David, the theocratic ruler appointed by God, has not been rejected. What we disagree on is that Jesus (his son) is the ruler of the race of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (Jer 33:26).
Nowhere is Jesus named in the Tanakh as the seed of David that will rule over Abraham, Issac, and Jacob… IT IS THE “SEED LINE” and not the individual.
)… but Hosea 14 is clear that when God calls one of His own out, it will be after they have let go of the idols (the false security that is grasped by the Gentiles)… and the ones who have let go of the idolatry (christianity) and heard that specific Word spoken, “you are my son/daughter” are the Eunuchs who will be happy to join back to the Jewish (the house of Judah… the husbandmen of the covenant) via the right way… conversion to Judaism… and THESE are the ones who will have names better than the sons and the daughters… my guess is due to they are one and the same as the suffering servant… Isaiah 53… the similarities in the wording describing Ephraim, the house of Israel, is uncanny. And this is already happening… that the People are joining back to the covenant via the calling they are getting from their God… and truly through the knowledge they bring back, the ties that bind God and Israel, the People (as a whole) are and will only be stronger. THIS, what I have just stated, is supported wholly by Isaiah… from beginning to end… and in fact, is supported through the whole of the Tanakh.I do not understand how your comment applies to your quoting of my reference to St. Paul. What is this “inserting a name into Isaiah claim”? Neither I nor St. Paul did such a thing. Where is the evidence to your accusations?
What is this “inserting a name into Isaiah claim”? Neither I nor St. Paul did such a thing. Where is the evidence to your accusations?
Philippians 2:9-11
Wherefore God also hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name:
That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth; And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.
This is just another prime example of Paul pulling out passages in the Tanakh and either deceptively knowing that most would not bother to verify or showing that he indeed was not Jewish (but by conversion only).
Isaiah 45:23, when put into context, is clearly not speaking of Jesus… but of God, the SAME ONE spoken of by Moses, the prophet, in Deut 4:14-15… the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob.
He, God, is ONE Lord… there is no other. And clearly Paul is saying that there is another by inserting Jesus, a man, into the place of God… even contradicting what Moses had said. Isaiah 47:3- 4 As for our redeemer, the LORD of hosts is his name, the Holy One of Israel. (don’t skip out on verse 3 though).
Isaiah 44:23 is clear that it is GOD (not a man) Who redeems Jacob (the Jewish), and that He, God, will glorify Himself IN ISRAEL.
Isaiah 42:8 Directly refutes what Paul says there in Philippians. The LORD (not Jesus) is His name. His glory He will not give to another and His praise will He give to the graven images.
And it is to the Eunuchs that the everlasting name, better than the sons and daughters is given… notice also they are not the Gentiles. This is in Isaiah 56. The name is to a THEM and not one man named Jesus.
In particular, you are making opinionated comments that are unclear and without evidence. You claim this gospel to be “his” as in reference to what? The document I referenced is St. Paul’s Letter to the Philippians. If that is not a letter from St. Paul, then who would it be from? Yes the letter is his if you do your historical research.
I say all of the above to answer you here… I am not doubting these letters are from a man named Paul… but any claims he makes to being Jewish, I do not believe given even that one example of his deceptive nature and/or lack of knowledge (take your pick… I guess both personally) … at best he was one of the hellenizers who converted to Judaism (or his family did) for the sake of filtering the Light of Truth that is brought to us via the Jewish who were TRUE warriors for their God and their faith, Judaism.
He obviously knew more about hellenistic mythologies than he did the Tanakh.
In addition, Letters are not Gospels, they are part of Scripture however. There are four distinct Gospels, none of which are written by him. Where do you get such inaccurate information? Do not confused the terms as you have done above.
I think I have done quite well in just sharing that tid bit of information with you
By the way…
Read 2 Timothy 2:8 … braggers too big for their own britches often give a bit too much information away, no? Read that verse and tell me… whose gospel is this?
Lastly, you ask if he can be trusted for what he is, a respected Jew who fulfills all the obligations of the Mosaic Law? Well you can look up your history. He is a RomanYes, I cut you off there… because that is ALL we actually have evidence of!!
He did not know the Mosaic Law… and apparently neither do you.
And as for my parents… I have more evidence that they are my parents and proof of our heritage than you do of Paul’s. Even still, I would never have to prove this to point out the Truth (that he felt the need to do such makes him all the more suspect)…
Have you ever heard the phrase, “throw caution to the wind” ??? I used to be a “control freak” as well… until I learned the itineraries I was scheduling might go smoother if I allowed some room for the “unexpected.” Sure enough…
Okaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay!
I would not want to make anyone feel uncomfortable by telling them I won’t acknowledge their thoughts that they took the time to write out and post … that includes YOU and the thought on your mind that you shared when you quoted another poster’s question that I may have missed the first time around and then posted:
simplynoone, you originally asked:
Q1 was answered, that Jesus Christ is ascended.
Proof for this?
Q2 I have learned that the scriptures were fulfilled.
Fulfilled how? For what purpose?
Q3 I believe in the resurrection because of the testamonies in the New Testament.
why do you believe it?
Q4 From Paul to 1 Corr 15:12, 17-18 (Douay): “12 Now if Christ be preached, that he arose again from the dead, how do some among you say, that there is no resurrection of the dead? …And if Christ be not risen again, your faith is vain, for you are yet in your sins. Then they also that are fallen asleep in Christ, are perished.” And Paul gives many examples here of those that saw Jesus after his death walking around and talking, etc.
Come on… be honest with us … certainly no need to lie … don’t you EVER suspect that your faith really is in vain because you have nothing as of yet to show for your strong stance in believing that a man was raised from the dead? Ever? Even once? I understand you are probably quick to deny the question, but surely the nagging reality is there in some suppressed cornor of your mind… that you actually DON’T know if Paul’s gospel is truth and in fact, everything around you is testifying that it was not truth at all.
I hope not to go too far into a tangent. If I may answer this question. I am unsure how this analogy works with what I believe. If you are suggesting the Bus is independent of the three people on it, you are correct in some ways. It is an inanimate object and so does not function on it’s own. Because of this, I do not see why the Bus itself is at fault. Should we then complain that guns are the true culprit of death by gunshot wounds?Okaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay!
So, if Jesus (the Son), the Creator (the father), and the Holy Spirit (the mother? according to Greek mythology, this would be a yes) are all ONE GOD… THEN clear this up for me…
Same scenario… just taking it a bit more down to the level of life for ya so as to help you out here (God, according to Jesus, his own self, is the God of the Living… therefore, the Word of God should testify to life, no?)::::
Peter, John, and James all climb aboard a bus heading downtown. Peter is the student; John is the monitor; and James is the driver… who exactly is responsible for that old lady getting hit two blocks back??
If you are to answer true to your “trinity theory” … there is only ONE culprit here to blame for the loss of the old lady’s life: that’d be the bus (representative of the whole God-head).
- Peter?? the student? for not obeying and shushing up whilst sitting on his bum as he was told to do by John, the monitor?
- John?? the monitor? who didn’t get up and FORCE PETER to comply so that James, the driver could concentrate on the road?
- or James?? the driver? for not keeping his eyes on the road but rather on the rearview … quite annoyed with both Peter (for not obeying) and John (for not forcing the compliance)??
What do you think (or not think… rather maybe, what are you told??)? I’ll wait whilst you go ask one of the “priests” in your church.
I would also like to answer this question as well if I may. To the particulars of your question, no I do not recall suspecting that my faith is in vain because of no strong evidence of resurrection. It is not because I believe blindly. I’m actually quite the opposite. I think quite a bit and make sure what I believe in is true. I do not want to offend God by misunderstanding him. In addition, I love learning, love science, love math, love the arts. All of which, to truly appreciate requires critical thinking. Blind faith in any of these tend to result in dissatisfaction when questions arises.Come on… be honest with us … certainly no need to lie … don’t you EVER suspect that your faith really is in vain because you have nothing as of yet to show for your strong stance in believing that a man was raised from the dead? Ever? Even once? I understand you are probably quick to deny the question, but surely the nagging reality is there in some suppressed cornor of your mind… that you actually DON’T know if Paul’s gospel is truth and in fact, everything around you is testifying that it was not truth at all.